I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
That works for every opposing/differing ideology as well, btw. I mean, of course you believe you're right (or at least more right than wrong), else you would've changed your mind already!
I agree that evidence dispels not willful ignorance! But, without trying to be pedantic, beliefs are not opinions. Opinions are like "I prefer vanilla to chocolate", not "the universe has/does not have a Creator". The first is a matter of preference (reality remains unaffected), the second is a matter of reality.
The word you chose was "ideology," which is effectively opinion. My point was that it is wrong to falsely equate religious beliefs with beliefs that are scientifically derived. The scientific process can also arrive at wrong conclusions, but unlike baseless claims/ideologies, the scientific process includes the ability to update beliefs as we gain more evidence and refine our knowledge. And its results are reproducible, which makes it more difficult for bad actors to sneak in falsehoods.
Science and ideology are in completely different fields (with exceptions found in social and humanistic sciences sometimes [always? 🤔]), the former dealing with the state of the world as we can sense it and the other with everything outside of it (ideology has directionality, ofc), and opinions are in a different category altogether. If we can both see X for what it is, X, but we have different emotions regarding it, it's an opinion. Science complements and informs belief/ideology, but you still have to believe/stand for something, right? Where do you think your morals come from? Science? How can we derive oughts from what is? Read some Hume and come back when you understand what you don't understand. 👍
Read some Hume and come back when you understand what you don't understand. 👍
Wow, a philbro in the wild.
Science complements and informs belief/ideology, but you still have to believe/stand for something, right?
No, you don't have to. I do, because I have functioning senses and a brain capable of applying reason.
Where do you think your morals come from? Science?
Correct. Biology and evolution gave us our minds. Science is a process we use to gather and refine knowledge. We know that vaccines are safe and effective. Those who can get them should, or others may suffer and die for their selfish choices. A selfish society is unsustainable.
How can we derive oughts from what is?
Pretty simply: we are living beings. We evolved and are still evolving our morals. Because we are the way we are (your "is"), we ought to reduce needless suffering.
Magic isn't real. Please grow up.
3
"My religion is the only valid one and yours is an heresy!" | Spyke
11 replies
--Stephen Roberts
That’s why I’m not religious.
I bet my non-religion is better than yours.
exactly
That works for every opposing/differing ideology as well, btw. I mean, of course you believe you're right (or at least more right than wrong), else you would've changed your mind already!
Not always. Evidence guides us to believe what is most likely true. Some opinions are wrong.
I agree that evidence dispels not willful ignorance! But, without trying to be pedantic, beliefs are not opinions. Opinions are like "I prefer vanilla to chocolate", not "the universe has/does not have a Creator". The first is a matter of preference (reality remains unaffected), the second is a matter of reality.
The word you chose was "ideology," which is effectively opinion. My point was that it is wrong to falsely equate religious beliefs with beliefs that are scientifically derived. The scientific process can also arrive at wrong conclusions, but unlike baseless claims/ideologies, the scientific process includes the ability to update beliefs as we gain more evidence and refine our knowledge. And its results are reproducible, which makes it more difficult for bad actors to sneak in falsehoods.
Science and ideology are in completely different fields (with exceptions found in social and humanistic sciences sometimes [always? 🤔]), the former dealing with the state of the world as we can sense it and the other with everything outside of it (ideology has directionality, ofc), and opinions are in a different category altogether. If we can both see X for what it is, X, but we have different emotions regarding it, it's an opinion. Science complements and informs belief/ideology, but you still have to believe/stand for something, right? Where do you think your morals come from? Science? How can we derive oughts from what is? Read some Hume and come back when you understand what you don't understand. 👍
Wow, a philbro in the wild.
No, you don't have to. I do, because I have functioning senses and a brain capable of applying reason.
Correct. Biology and evolution gave us our minds. Science is a process we use to gather and refine knowledge. We know that vaccines are safe and effective. Those who can get them should, or others may suffer and die for their selfish choices. A selfish society is unsustainable.
Pretty simply: we are living beings. We evolved and are still evolving our morals. Because we are the way we are (your "is"), we ought to reduce needless suffering.
Magic isn't real. Please grow up.