Can science justify atheism in people that don't understand science?

[Bellicus]

I often see people that are atheist, because of what the science tells. But I usually also see the same people don't really understand the science they use to justify their view. So don't this make this kind of people just as religious as anyone else, since their view is not based on knowledge, but belief?

 

[awitch]

I often see people that are atheist, because of what the science tells. But I usually also see the same people don't really understand the science they use to justify their view. So don't this make this kind of people just as religious as anyone else, since their view is not based on knowledge, but belief?

Personally, I don't think people are atheists because of what science tells them. They are atheist because there is no empirical evidence of any divinity.

Lots of people don't understand how the processor in their computer works, but that doesn't mean they are religious because they use it.

 

[IBM]

I often see people that are atheist, because of what the science tells. But I usually also see the same people don't really understand the science they use to justify their view. So don't this make this kind of people just as religious as anyone else, since their view is not based on knowledge, but belief?

Well a christian may or may not understand or know the theology behind his belief as well. So in return I have to ask is a christian that has no knowledge of the Bible justified in saying Scripture proves their claims or views? Or anybody from any ideology for that manner. I see this all the time as well. Ignorance is bliss, and it exists everywhere.

To answer your question I see your point and how it could be concieved as a faith in science or how some may blindly follow science automatically over religion (based on personal set of ethics ideas, and I suppose what psychologically appeals to the individual more). Most atheists I know have at least a basic background in science, as do Christians in scripture. Some people however, don't really expand on this foundation and are content living in their comfort zone. There's nothing one can really do about it. Don't make the mistake of considering Atheism a religion or religious belief though.

 

[UncleHermit]

I don't know that I'd call it a religious belief, at least not by any definition of religious that I'm aware of. But I don't think that it can be called justified either. Do you have an example of why someone would be an atheist "because of what science tells"? I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that.

 

[IBM]

Personally, I don't think people are atheists because of what science tells them. They are atheist because there is no empirical evidence of any divinity.

Excellent point.

 

[UncleHermit]

Personally, I don't think people are atheists because of what science tells them. They are atheist because there is no empirical evidence of any divinity.

Well, people can be atheists (or theists) for all sorts of reasons, justified or not.

 

[IBM]

Well, people can be atheists (or theists) for all sorts of reasons, justified or not.

Like any belief. Science however doesn't tell people to stop beliving in God per say, there are religious scientists, but some of the evidence/concepts brought about and the lack of emphircal evidence when talking about the supernatural can challenge religion or the concept of God. Atheism or naturalism is based soley on viewing the universe from the natural perspective and using the scientific method to come up with conclusions or when studying particular subjects. The thing is you can't prove religion, yet you can't entirely disprove it either. The only thing you can do is look at what you got and draw a conclusion based on the surrounding evidence, logic, and natural law. So it is both true and false by saying atheists base their belief on science. It's not science in itself that makes people atheists but many aspects or concepts belonging to science motivate disbelief or skepticism in religion or the super natural (which is often based on faith).

 

[Bombila]

I often see people that are atheist, because of what the science tells. But I usually also see the same people don't really understand the science they use to justify their view. So don't this make this kind of people just as religious as anyone else, since their view is not based on knowledge, but belief?

I don't think many people are 'atheist because of what the science tells', since science doesn't speak to the presence or absence of gods. However, for example, a person who has been a strong believer in creationism and a young earth but is subsequently convinced by scientific evidence that the earth is old and evolution evidence is solid may wholly reject the religion that told him to believe the former, reasoning that if they were wrong about that, they were likely wrong about god, too.

I understand your point - there are people who are obviously not informed enough about the science they point to as reason for their disbelief for that to be a realistic reason for their rejection of faith. Sometimes I notice such persons are very young, in their teens, and I doubt if their position re god-belief is settled. They may change their minds on the subject several times as they mature.

Sometimes, though, such people, while they may misapprehend scientific concepts or appear less than well-informed, are making a valid statement because what they trust is not science, but other people who they respect and trust not to lie to them, and they usually have very good reasons for that trust.

I don't have any chemistry background, so science that entails a knowledge of chemistry is difficult for me to follow. However, I trust that chemists as a group, who have presented us with a whole lot of chemistry that works as advertised, aren't making stuff up. (Why would they?) So I don't 'have faith' in chemists/chemistry, I just see the results of their work and expect when they talk about chemistry, they are being truthful. So even though I don't understand chemistry very well, my belief that chemists are truthful is evidence based, not faith based. And that probably is the case with some atheists who reason that a scientific consensus on evolution and age of earth, whether they personally understand geology or evolution themselves, is good enough to accept as evidence based truth.

 

[UncleHermit]

Like any belief. Science however doesn't tell people to stop beliving in God per say, there are religious scientists, but some of the evidence/concepts brought about and the lack of emphircal evidence when talking about the supernatural can challenge religion or the concept of God. Atheism or naturalism is based soley on viewing the universe from the natural perspective and using the scientific method to come up with conclusions or when studying particular subjects. The thing is you can't prove religion, yet you can't entirely disprove it either. The only thing you can do is look at what you got and draw a conclusion based on the surrounding evidence, logic, and natural law. So it is both true and false by saying atheists base their belief on science. It's not science in itself that makes people atheists but many aspects or concepts belonging to science motivate disbelief or skepticism in religion or the super natural (which is often based on faith).

All I'm saying is that not all atheists take this sort of approach towards their nonbelief, and it doesn't seem to me to be this sort of atheist that the OP is referring to (although I'd prefer to wait for clarification from the OPer about that).

 

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings!

Personally, I don't think people are atheists because of what science tells them. They are atheist because there is no empirical evidence of any divinity.

False premise, I fear!

There is equally no empirical evidence either that God does or doesn't exist.

That's why religions are called "faiths."

Nor is science any obstacle (either way) to this: true religion and science are perfectly capable of coexisting side by side, and indeed, some religions explicitly advocate and praise science!

Peace,

Bruce

 

[Rasta]

I often see people that are atheist, because of what the science tells. But I usually also see the same people don't really understand the science they use to justify their view. So don't this make this kind of people just as religious as anyone else, since their view is not based on knowledge, but belief?

Personaly I understand the basic mechanics of science. I'm not an expert by any means. Though my reason for disbelief is due to the fact that god is not percievable by any means other than dynamics that (should they exsist) seem closely related to imagination or cooincidence.

On the other hand, you don't have to be a genius to understand that:

Donkeys and snakes don't talk.

6,000-10,000 years does not equal or come close to being 4.5 Billion years.

The myth of Adam and Eve does not match up with any available evidence. Dinosaurs were extinct for a long time before humans were around.

Really, it's the YEC's who dig their own graves by denying science, in favor for their unsupported opinions.

It's not rocket science.

Could you give an example of what you are talking about?

 

[Osiris]

False premise, I fear!

There is equally no empirical evidence either that God does or doesn't exist.

Let's see.

There is no emperical evidence for the existence of big foot. True.

There is no emperical evidence for the non-existence of big foot. ... impossible. cannot be determined even if the reality was that big foot did not exist. arguments like these are that cause false premises.

anyway. If there is no emperical evidence for neither, what do you suggest the position be?

 

[Garyzenuf]

I don't have the time to become a scientist (or the brains or money for that matter ), but the faith I require to believe in science is only limited by my own choices. If I really want to get the straight goods on Biology for example, I can sign up at my local community college and take a course, or go online for detailed explanation of what I want to know. Religion does not afford me this choice. All Christianity offers me is peoples opinions, and a non-updated book from 2000 years ago.

I don't think I possess the faith to be a good christian, but I have juuuuust enough motivation to be a secularist.

 

[Im_A]

I often see people that are atheist, because of what the science tells. But I usually also see the same people don't really understand the science they use to justify their view. So don't this make this kind of people just as religious as anyone else, since their view is not based on knowledge, but belief?

atheism is a way of life. its more than using science to not believe in some deity.

 

[Futuwwa]

What has science to do with atheism?

 

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings, greetings!

If there is ... emperical evidence for neither, what do you suggest the position be?

I suggset endeavoring to make a decision as informed as possible through the pursuit of the available options, including (but not limited to) reading, prayer, research, investigation, observation, and evaluation!

All this may well result in a heuristic conclusion subject to later updating and revision, but this is often the only choice when we're faced with such questions (and please note I didn't call them "imponderables"). Further, IME such choices not infrequently turn out to yield excellent results.

I further note that various scripures both encourage or command such investigation, and promise that the sincere seeker will be assisted/guided.

Best regards,

Bruce

 

[Lord Emsworth]

So don't this make this kind of people just as religious as anyone else, since their view is not based on knowledge, but belief?

Flat out No. Believing in some thing or another is not equivalent with being religious.

And what is more, being religous is not equivalent with believing in God(s). And neither is not being religious with not believing in God(s).

 

[SecretOfFatima]

I often see people that are atheist, because of what the science tells. But I usually also see the same people don't really understand the science they use to justify their view. So don't this make this kind of people just as religious as anyone else, since their view is not based on knowledge, but belief?

Science surely can prove the existence of a creator, As such I think that atheists must have more faith then we believers, because the scientific odds are pretty good in favour of a creator.

But leaving aside such reasoning, I'm 100% convinced that people are atheists due to sin, hence it's easier for them to turn away from GOD than to repent and ask for forgiveness.

However Sin is a vicious circle, the more deeper one falls into sin the bigger the chains, we can see this all around us, depression, husbands not loving their wifes, marriages breaking up, etc...

John Paul II once wrote in the theology of the body about the diferences between men and women, and he pointed out how men and women are wired diferently, men have been designed to love their wifes and wifes can only love a men if they are first loved, have you considered that the problems with the world today is because sin is stopping men from loving their families (to love is to give), and in turn women who do not feel loved go out into the world searching to be loved, one can look at all the plastic surgery, botox, short skirts, etc, etc... when they feel good about themselves then they received the attention from men, that they probably would not receive otherwise, i'm not sure if you following my line of thinking but if you are then i'm sure you understand.

 

[awitch]

Science surely can prove the existence of a creator, As such I think that atheists must have more faith then we believers, because the scientific odds are pretty good in favour of a creator.

And how do you figure that? Science has yet to find any evidence of a Creator...if you have some, I'd love to see it.

 

[SecretOfFatima]

And how do you figure that? Science has yet to find any evidence of a Creator...if you have some, I'd love to see it.

I will have to upload it to the web again when I have the oportunity.