Atheists, Agnostics, and Anti-theists of ModDB
Educational
A group for those without religion, as well as those who oppose it. Atheism and Agnosticism and Anti-theism.
Tim Minchin
(view original)
Post a comment
A group for those without religion, as well as those who oppose it. Atheism and Agnosticism and Anti-theism.
(buried)
Wrooooooong!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Faith is confirmed through observation, but faith must come first before observations can be made.
WRONG. Faith is to believe without evidence (= without reason). It's basically "Here is the conclusion, how can we make the evidence fit?" instead of what science does, which is "Here is the evidence, what conclusions can we draw from it?"
Before the evidence is presented, even through science, there must be the belief that the evidence exists and that the theory is correct.
Wrong. In Science, you make an observation, and then try to explain it.
Not make **** up and then try to observe it.
Thats not what I said and you know it. The attempt to explain something still requires the belief that there is an explanation, otherwise nobody would attempt to explain anything. I'm just trying to point out the flaw in your claim that faith (or belief) is not required. This is in of itself a belief that you yourself hold. Thats all I'm sayin'.
What do you mean? If, as you say, one has to "believe" that evidence exists, what exactly would someone think if they believed that evidence DIDN'T exist? By definition of the word, I don't think that's even possible :/
Then they simply don't believe that evidence exists for something. The point is that faith (belief) is a requirement of everyday life. We could not make choices or form opinions without it. Same goes for free will. If it didn't exist, we could not form opinions or make decisions and there would be no structure to society at all.
The only belief I could see in science is that certain theories are correct. Evidence is invariably there, I don't think it's possible to disprove that. When I trip and fall flat on my face, there is evidence of gravity. That has absolutely nothing to do with faith :/
I know that. This is about the flawed argument that faith and belief are not required at all. They apply to things that are not 100% with absolutely no doubt proven.
Ah I see. Well, while theories do require 'belief', they don't involve faith in the religious sense. Theories are based on facts, and scientists accept that they may be entirely wrong, altering them as new evidence emerges- which is the very point demonstrated in the image above.