Hey, some good news!

Hey, some good news!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2250096/You-wouldnt-believe-atheism-worlds-biggest-faith-Christianity-Islam.html

Comments

Brian Earle said…
Right Eli Fennell .  Fundamentalism is the problem, not belief.  Belief is inevitable.  It's when I put my truth in your face that the problems begin.
Brian Earle said…
Each kind of fundamentalism presents its own danger.  Is the  Borg atheistic?
Brian Earle said…
Interesting question.  Borg Royalty=Deity.
John Hummel said…
Brian Earle please do not confuse atheism with belief. Do you believe in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny? Do you consider your non-belief in these entities a "belief"? No, you simply view those who do believe in such things as childish and foolish.

There is an infinity of things in which we all do not believe. That does not make all of us "believers in an infinity of non-things". Same with atheists. We simply reject one more thing than most people do. But anyone with a bit of mathematical saaavy knows that infinity + 1 is just still the same value of infinity.
John Hummel said…
You would be fun to have a conversation with, Eli Fennell!
John Hummel said…
Your grasp of recursion is most impressive, Eli Fennell. Training in mathematics or computer science, perchance?
John Hummel said…
You know, making puns cancels the effects of making recursive observations...
John Hummel said…
Oh! Pow! You win, Eli Fennell!
John Hummel said…
Yes, I do... ironically, I'm about to take them to their martial arts class (no I'm not kidding). It all comes full circle...
Brian Earle said…
John Hummel  You're mind is obviously sharper than mine.  So the belief that there's no Easter Bunny, and the belief that those who think otherwise are childish and foolish, these are a different class of belief than the belief that there is a God, is that correct?
John Hummel said…
If I can correctly follow the negatives and lacks thereof, Brian Earle, then I would say yes: The belief that there is no easter bunny is qualitatively different than the belief that there is a god. Much as the belief that 2 X 2 = 4 is qualitatively different than the belief that, say, root(2) is rational. (Although I will confess that the belief that root(2) is rational is provably false in a way that the belief in god is not, so it's not a perfect analogy.)
Brian Earle said…
Thanks John Hummel .  Proof and certainty, these are curious.  It seems to me that consensus plays an important role in both, although I suppose one can be certain there is a God based on personal experience.  Interestingly this same consensus taken to the extreme can become a dangerous cult or a Borg like society.
John Hummel said…
Sorry, Brian Earle, I absolutely did not mean to leave you with the impression one can have certainty in the existence of a god! (I for one believe god's existence is as unlikely as Santa's, as I tried unsuccessfully to suggest in an earlier comment.)

And no. Consensus plays no role in truth. We cannot form a commttee to decide whether 2 + 2 = 5. Or rather, we could, but it's deliberations would be meaningless.

And Eli Fennell, I'm afraid you've got the problem induction exactly right. I can no more disprove the existence of god than I can the existence of the easter bunny. But if you have good inductive reasons to believe in some kind of god -- or the easter bunny -- then it is rational (e.g., from a Bayesian perspective) to believe in said god or bunny. But it's an inductive inference and so never guaranteed to be right.
Jeff Chapman said…
Reason is gaining on fiction. Yeah!

Popular posts from this blog

So, I asked Andrew Tamm, who filled my Stream with a hundred (sarcasm there) animated gifs and cat pictures to...

I'm shutting down Google+ for the night and quite possibly for the weekend.