Here Come the 'Faith-Heads'

What is faith anyway? - To hold a position based on faith... Is really saying that one holds a position devoid of evidence. But of course that is the nature of religion. Religion without faith, would be a very odd kind of religion. Indeed, to the religious mystic, it is somehow more noble to hold a position purely on faith, than it is to present evidence for one's position.

The trouble with faith is, that by its very 'nature' it flies in the face of reason. If a person holds a position based on faith, then this can lead to unreasonable behavior and it does so, because reason is not applicable. But worse still and even more destructive than faith on its own, is the combination of faith and religion.

The fact is that the more 'honestly' religious one attempts to be; then the more one is reliant on a faith position and at the expense of reasoned behavior and this inevitably leads to dishonesty. The fact is that we now live in a World being torn asunder by individuals, that truly believe that a position held purely on faith, is somehow more reasonable than reason itself.

We now live in a World that is under attack by religious extremists, who think their position held purely on faith and without any evidence, gives them the 'God given' right to bully 'infidels' who rely on more reasoned behavior. Those infidels of course, also include the less faithful religious moderates, who while still holding irrational beliefs are at least more tolerant.

The difference between a "faith-head" who bullies and initiates force, such as in the form of suicide bombing, as apposed to the more mild fundamentalist "faith-head" who feels the need to bully in the form of religious indoctrination, by undermining science education and attempting to "pull down the Wall" of separation between Church and State... The difference is only of degree and not of kind. Each is hostile to reasoned argument and think they have the right to bully and coerce from a position of faith. Indeed, they want to drag us back, to living in a Dark Age World, where reasoned argument and scientific inquiry; are trumped by religious fundamentalism.

Many individuals hold positions that are believed purely on faith, such as those that believe in astrology or homeopathy both of which have no evidence in their favor. But the faith of astrological and homeopathic believes does not seem to lead to extreme fundamentalism. But the combination of religion and faith is a devastating combination. While we live in a World, where individuals believe that the faith of religion somehow trumps reasonable argument, then while those beliefs are held, then we will live in a World which is separated in conflict, between the reasonable and the irrational.

How I make money from this article and how you can make money too. Please Click here to email me! Please do not remove 'permission' from body of email.

* Spyware IT
o Instantly protect your PC from malicious spyware, adware and malware invasions!

Atheism or Religion?

The claim that neither religion or atheism is right, is on its surface, a fair pronouncement, that somehow you can weigh one logically against the other and each is equally preferable. But when you dig a bit, you realize it is a hollow claim. It is a claim that presupposes an equal footing, between religion and atheism. Therefore, one cannot disprove the religious position and thus, one has to hold just as much faith that there is no God; as a theist holds that there is. Let us 'dig' in, to see why the claim is a poor one.

When an atheist says there is no God, it is based on probability and that probability is arrived at, based on the improbability of the claim. This simply means, it is improbable based on the simple fact, that there is no evidence to lead to probability. On the other hand, when a religious person says they believe in God, it is not a belief based on probability, rather, is is a belief built on faith and tradition.

Thus, we arrive at two different methods of knowledge. The religious position that holds the God concept as true, is a belief based purely on faith and tradition, whereas, the atheist position against the concept of God, is held as a belief grounded in improbability.

One can say as an atheist, there is no evidence to back up the religious proposition and therefore, there is no reason to hold it up as probable, until such evidence can be presented. A theist on the other hand, cannot say, 'there is no evidence against the possibility of God, therefore God is a probable concept'.

For a theist to say, there is no evidence against the concept of God, is really no different, than that of a mystic, who believes in the tooth fairy and saying: 'one has no evidence against the possibility of tooth fairies, therefore, they should be held in the realm of the probable'.

The very point is, that the concept of God lies within the same category as tooth fairies, hobgoblins, gremlins, ghosts, vampires - et al, none of these arbitrary mind-spun concepts can be disproved or indeed proved, that is because one cannot prove or disprove a negative. What one can do however, is offer a base of probability and simply say, unless you can present any evidence, then your claim is simply an arbitrary speculation and remains in the category of improbable.

Indeed, because the God concept lies in the same arbitrary conceptual category as tooth fairies, that is enough on its own, not only to dismiss it as improbable, but most likely impossible.

What makes the God concept an arbitrary concept, not to be taken seriously as a probable event, is the fact that it is a supernatural speculation. Supernatural means 'above nature'. This alone means it is unprovable by the laws of nature, because to prove it, one would have to do so, through some supernatural means. One would have to suspend all know laws of physics, to grasp 'a straw' that would bring the God concept into the realm of the probable. The fact that it's a supernatural speculation, is enough on its own to dismiss it as nonsense.

There is another point here too, and it is one that theists are liable to forget to mention. The burden of proof in any honest claim; or an attempt at a claim of probability, is that, the burden of proof is with the one making the claim. So, if someone makes a claim that God exists, then the burden of proof is their's. Unless such evidence can be presented, then an atheist has every right, to hold the God concept up, to be as likely as tooth fairies and hobgoblins.




How I make money from this article and how you can make money too. Please Click here to email me! Please do not remove 'permission' from body of email.

* The Perfect Keylogger
o Log keystrokes, take screenshots and monitor computer use, automatically!