kowalskil Posted June 8, 2012 Report Share Posted June 8, 2012 My article about futile confrontations between theists and atheists appeared in the April 2012 Issue of American Atheist Magazine. The link is: http://csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/theo/atheist.html Please share this link with other potential readers. Thank you in advance, Ludwik Kowalski (see Wikipedia) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dream_weaver Posted June 8, 2012 Report Share Posted June 8, 2012 "The first step toward mutual respect between theists and atheists should be the recognition that most people on Earth live in two different worlds: material and spiritual." What does this do to resolve the breech you've introduced between existence and consciousness, that is the breech introduced between body and mind? All people on Earth live in the same world, semantically divided by lack of an integrated, non-contradictory philosophy guided by adherence to the principles discovered by reason using the methods of logic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicky Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 Theology is like mathematics, not science. Mathematicians start with axioms (initially accepted truths) and use logical derivation to justify consecutive claims, called theorems. Once proven, a theorem cannot be rejected, unless a logical error is found in the derivation. Science is very different. Here, claims are justified, in the final analysis, by experimental observations, not by pure logic. If "experimental observation" is what claims are justified by, in the final analysis, then wouldn't the notion that "experimental observations" are what justify claims be an axiom of science? Everything has an irreducible starting point, even science. The real difference is the kind of starting point science has: reality, consciousness observing reality, and identity (logic) are the axioms we rely on to build our wealth of scientific knowledge upon. These are axioms because they are implicit in any statement anyone makes, even the statement "there's no such thing as existence, consciousness and identity". In contrast, the starting points theologians use are arbitrary. Randomly made up, they have nothing to do with reality. Do you means to suggest that mathematics is also built on such arbitrary starting points? If you do, I think many around here would love to argue against your position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.