Timeline for Are atheism and theism equally based on faith?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2020 at 8:34 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Mar 20, 2019 at 9:18 | comment | added | Luaan | @Vality Most importantly, science also clearly says what would violate those assumptions. If the Sun didn't come out one day, in contradiction of what our theories say, the theories would need to change. If experiments stopped being repeatable (outside of the usual complexities of making a reliable experiment in the first place), we wouldn't keep saying "keep your faith in science" - we'd say "oops, seems like some of our assumptions were wrong". This isn't even a prediction - it already happened in the past, many times. Theists usually see this as a weakness, unfortunately. | |
| Mar 19, 2019 at 18:49 | comment | added | Vality | Consequently, I would accept the claim that models which do not include a God or gods fit the observations of the observer and thus are reasonable models to predict future outcomes. But I do not consider this to make any assertion on if theism is true or real, merely that a model without it has matched observations thus far. Going any further to say this makes a claim or statement on the existence (or non existence) of a God or gods is indeed faith. | |
| Mar 19, 2019 at 18:47 | comment | added | Vality | @lazarusL As an agnostic theist I would at least personally agree any understanding of "truth" or "rules" in the universe requires faith. However I don't see science as there to "prove the truth" rather it is there to construct models which through observation are shown to generally match real outcomes. It would be faith to say these models are fundamentally "true" but I would accept the claim that these models match the observations made so far, and so are reasonable models of normal future behavior also. | |
| Mar 18, 2019 at 18:59 | comment | added | lazarusL | "However, this puts you in a (very unreasonable, in my opinion) position that everything is faith." I think this is the key point. My understanding is that Theists would be fine with that assessment. I think the argument goes: trust in science just collapses into nihilism with a little prodding, unless you have faith in the underlying epistemological philosophy. | |
| Mar 18, 2019 at 17:31 | comment | added | Cullub | This is a good answer. I'm rather a theist than an atheist, but you soundly explained a logically reasonable position without making blanket statements or "obvious" assumptions. +10 if I could. | |
| Mar 18, 2019 at 12:32 | history | edited | Eff | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 5 characters in body
|
| Mar 18, 2019 at 12:24 | history | edited | Eff | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Mar 18, 2019 at 12:08 | history | edited | Eff | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 24 characters in body
|
| Mar 18, 2019 at 12:00 | history | edited | Eff | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 7 characters in body
|
| Mar 18, 2019 at 11:54 | history | edited | Eff | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 249 characters in body
|
| Mar 18, 2019 at 11:44 | history | edited | Eff | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 187 characters in body
|
| Mar 18, 2019 at 10:34 | history | edited | Eff | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 10 characters in body
|
| Mar 18, 2019 at 10:28 | history | edited | Eff | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Mar 18, 2019 at 10:18 | history | edited | Eff | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 5 characters in body
|
| Mar 18, 2019 at 10:12 | history | answered | Eff | CC BY-SA 4.0 |