@ hugh . atheism as i understand is not the absence of belief in god. it is the belief that god doesn't exist and that believing that god exists is wrong. atheism is a negative belief. that is why i say atheism like theism demands blind devotion.
if atheism is zero belief in god i have no quarrel . in fact i am with you. but the fact is that it is a strong negative belief. and that is why like theism atheism too is unsustainable.
reasoning as you know is the process of setting a relation between cause and effect. from theory to incident. or vice versa. that is , for every incident we are trying to find and fit a theory , an explanation. now the problem is that we have a finite set of explanations which we are trying to fit into an infinite set of incidents. the biggest problem however is that the set of explanations which we are boasting off is limited in quality too. it is derived basically from our wisdom or accumulated knowledge. to cut it short , reasoning is not a scale with which we can measure every thing.
logic is a simple tool which we use for linking simple things . no one has ever claimed universal reach for logic.
now for examples. how do we explain the origin of the universe ? neither theists nor atheists can help. is the universe running on weak force and strong force or some other force ? when a tiger kills a deer who is right and who is wrong ?
crux of the matter is that our ability to understand things is limited . by design. could even be divine intervention . who knows ? we are no different from the house fly which can not comprehend the existence of a window glass or the frog in the well who thinks the world is a ten feet wide circle filled with water. this is design deficiency.
so positive belief is ok . zero belief is ok . but negative belief may be too silly to be sustainable.
if atheism is zero belief in god i have no quarrel . in fact i am with you. but the fact is that it is a strong negative belief. and that is why like theism atheism too is unsustainable.
reasoning as you know is the process of setting a relation between cause and effect. from theory to incident. or vice versa. that is , for every incident we are trying to find and fit a theory , an explanation. now the problem is that we have a finite set of explanations which we are trying to fit into an infinite set of incidents. the biggest problem however is that the set of explanations which we are boasting off is limited in quality too. it is derived basically from our wisdom or accumulated knowledge. to cut it short , reasoning is not a scale with which we can measure every thing.
logic is a simple tool which we use for linking simple things . no one has ever claimed universal reach for logic.
now for examples. how do we explain the origin of the universe ? neither theists nor atheists can help. is the universe running on weak force and strong force or some other force ? when a tiger kills a deer who is right and who is wrong ?
crux of the matter is that our ability to understand things is limited . by design. could even be divine intervention . who knows ? we are no different from the house fly which can not comprehend the existence of a window glass or the frog in the well who thinks the world is a ten feet wide circle filled with water. this is design deficiency.
so positive belief is ok . zero belief is ok . but negative belief may be too silly to be sustainable.
No comments:
Post a Comment