Friday, August 3, 2007

i've argued that religion does not enhance the user-experience of life, but merely pollute it with nonsensical gibberish that has no supporting evidence--and they've had, according to them, some 6,000 years to come up with some. on the other hand, the scientific method in comparison has brought us mounds of evidence that has brought us great progress, but no light has yet been shed on immaculate conceptions.

but can you separate science from religion? is science, as some has commented, merely a tool of humanity, while spirituality another? not bloody likely. everything is science. if you can consider it, question it, examine it, it is worthy of scientific study.

the most common, and least practical, theological argument for god goes something like this: "god is beyond science, and therefore cannot be tested by it. since there is an effect (matter) there must be a cause, which cannot be matter, and therefore, only god can fill that role."

of course, with this logic, you can believe anything you want. and it doesn't answer for the type of god: a deism view, or that of a personal god, or that of a trinity, perhaps a god that really likes ice cream. that leap is made by means of our historical and geographical placement in social history.

there are currently dozens of popular perspectives on what god is, and guess what--they're not compatible. so either one perspective is correct, or none of them are.

in light of these great odds and great enlightenment through science and reason, what types of compelling evidence do believers have to offer when it comes to their affirmations?

"well, i believe...[sic]"

can reason stand a chance in the face of belief?

in my own experience, believers and non-believers pan out at about 50/50. i could dissect each side and probably find that about 25/50 believers are probably bullshitting themselves and everyone else. the other 25 probably don't think much about it--it's more or less cultural convenience than dogma in such cases.

i still wait for some compelling evidence, but i won't hold my breath. and so i am.

No comments: