Have atheists redefined science to get rid of God?

BoGoWo:

Neither do those who live thier live 'as best they know how'. I hear your critique of many religions and thier lack of action. But the athiest crowd seems to me to be atleast as non-giving and less organized.

I think you can rally around a creed that you are doing just fine without God and hate the religious for thier lack of action - and then you have to look inside yourself and answer 'what am I doing about it?' (it being hunger, or war, or what have you.)

I have yet to see an athiest childcare, outreach, or charitable giving process - despite all thier bravado that you can do good without a God.

If so - put up.

TTF

0 Replies

The topic of this thread is misleading; there are scientists that are both a scientist and religious (believe in a god).

0 Replies

Agreed CI.

I think Athiests are probably in the minority in the science arena. Not that this is some sort of penis measuring competition. My students often think that all philosophers are athiests too.

TF

0 Replies

When an atheist does something charitable he does not label it an atheist event. He simply acts, with no mention of religious views, which is what many Christians also do. I personally have done much to help others, but have never mentioned what I know concerning religion, ever. There are altruistic atheists and selfish ones, same as with religious folk.

0 Replies

edgar, One thing I am pretty sure of is the fact that no matter what belief one has about religion or atheism, the good and bad are pretty equal; we are all humans.

0 Replies

Exactly what I'm trying to say, CI. This type of thread doesn't make much sense to me.

0 Replies

No, atheists have not "redefined" science to get rid of God. Science uses a logical and systematic method to learn about the universe in which we find ourselves. Although science has found no evidence of - or need for - any gods, there is no scientific way to prove or disprove the existence of magical beings unless they have measurable effects on the real world.

Theists, on the other hand, have been known to twist scientific principles (such as the second law of thermodynamics) out of all recognition in order to "prove" the existence of their favorite deity.

0 Replies

thethinkfactory wrote:

BoGoWo:

Neither do those who live thier live 'as best they know how'. I hear your critique of many religions and thier lack of action. But the athiest crowd seems to me to be atleast as non-giving and less organized.

I think you can rally around a creed that you are doing just fine without God and hate [please, i don't 'hate' anyone, for any reason; i merely disagree with some ideas, and agendas] the religious for thier lack of action - and then you have to look inside yourself and answer 'what am I doing about it?' (it being hunger, or war, or what have you.)

I have yet to see an athiest childcare, outreach, or charitable giving process - despite all thier bravado that you can do good without a God.

If so - put up.

TTF

I think you miss the point tF;

atheism, is simply an intellectual position, that there are no deities responsible for creating, and/or suprvising this planet, and/or its inhabitants.

it is not an organized religion with members, meeting houses, fees, and a creed to which all 'atheists' adhere.

[as a matter of fact, i would never call myself an 'atheist' as i resent being defined socially, by what i do NOT believe!]

look at Bertrand Russel if you wish an excellent example of a person who did not believe in the existence of deities, who was a famous, and prolific activist in supprt of 'peace', rationalism, and any number of important causes.

[don't spend much time wandering around searching for the 'church of Atheism'!]

0 Replies

I hasten to add that in a universe where absolutely nothing matters, religious belief is merely one of the total spectrum of things that do not matter.
So if we wish to give meaning to our lives, we must do so by acting upon our logical assessment of how resources should be shared on this planet, and do our utmost as human beings to help accomplish that goal.

Whether we do it under the burden of organized religion, or by joining hands with like minded individuals, regardless of their religious beliefs, to do our best, to make things 'matter'.

0 Replies

thethinkfactory wrote:

BoGoWo:

Neither do those who live thier live 'as best they know how'. I hear your critique of many religions and thier lack of action. But the athiest crowd seems to me to be atleast as non-giving and less organized.

I think you can rally around a creed that you are doing just fine without God and hate the religious for thier lack of action - and then you have to look inside yourself and answer 'what am I doing about it?' (it being hunger, or war, or what have you.)

I have yet to see an athiest childcare, outreach, or charitable giving process - despite all thier bravado that you can do good without a God.

If so - put up.

TTF

Plenty of charities are secular, Red Cross, World Food Programme, UNICEF, mm

Why would atheists need a separate organisation?

0 Replies

Good points. Well taken.

Here is my frustration:

I see massive groups of theists doing mission work - giving millions to the poor - setting up outreach programs - and so on.

When I talk to many athiests - they seem angry at theists, say that they do not need God to help, and then don't.

I have an organization that reminds me daily to give, and help the poor. I don't see the same output, nor the same efforts on the non-theists - yet the bravado that the same can occur.

However, your secular organizations are well taken.

TTF

0 Replies

The theists have their reward, doing their giving in public. But, don't assume they are the only ones who give.

0 Replies

Atheists, despite the numbers that post on a2k, are very much a minority in the world. Assuming an equal amount of charitable work is being done by the faithful and the faithless, or even going out on a limb and claiming the faithless were doing a good deal more, the preponderance of the evidence would indicate the religious were behind most of the world's good works. Its basic math.

Atheists by and large are not organized as the religious are. Apart from a lack of belief in Gods, atheists may have nothing in common. Without organization or a shared set of values, they have no opportunity to develop or discover common goals. Nor do they have a ready forum in which to publicize the work they must, of necessity, do individually.

On the other hand, atheists are not inclined to consider the exportation of "enlightened" religious views to people along with the food, medicine, and clothing they actually need- as particularly charitable. Winning souls for God is the essential point of the "mission"; and so obviously, the atheist must be mission-free.

It could be argued that the atheist who gives of his time and money in good works does so out of motives more pure than the average Christian's; he has no recruiting agenda, no hope of a celestial reward, and no recognition from a cadre of fellow "believers".

0 Replies

Greyfan, I'm sure there are many atheists like me who give to charity on a regular basis without expecting any recognition. I've given most of my working life to charities, and even worked for a couple of charities during the last 18 years of my career - at much reduced income, without any regrets. I've been retired for eight years now, and have given to charities every year, but now limited to Second Harvest Food Bank and Habitat for Humanities. I did give to the International Red Cross recently for the Tsunami Disaster Relief. I'm sure many atheists also give to religiously run charities.

0 Replies

Thethinkfactory

Being atheist doesn't mean being deprived of any ethical conception. I have my ethical philosophy, and that includes the concept of solidarity. And I belong to organizations that provide, in the field, help to people in extreme need. I don't care if those organizations are based in religious principles. What matters to me is what they do, and what they do is good according to my ethical criteria.

About science.
Science has its own language and its own definition of knowledge. That includes the definition of what is a scientific fact, as something very different from a perceptive fact, an artistical fact or a religious fact.
Science codifies its own questions, and answers according to that code. And, in other levels, religion, art, philosophy codify their own questions.

That is why the same question, like "what is life" can have so many different answers according to the initial "code" - in this case, the system were we include to concept "life".
A religious person can answer: life is a gift.
An artist: life is creation.
A philosopher: life is the essence in the existence.
A scientist: life is an interactive game of molecules (Atlan).

We must try not to mix all these uses of the concept. Because it doesn't mean the some thing in each referential system.

0 Replies

I believe there was a bible passage (forgive me for not knowing but I'm entirely Bible literate though I have read teh whole thing) and it basically says woe to those who practice faith and throw it around so everyone can see and admire you for doing it. For you will be left outside teh gates of heaven (or soemthing dramatic like that). I believe that applies to

Quote:

I see massive groups of theists doing mission work - giving millions to the poor - setting up outreach programs - and so on.

When I talk to many athiests - they seem angry at theists, say that they do not need God to help, and then don't.

I have an organization that reminds me daily to give, and help the poor. I don't see the same output, nor the same efforts on the non-theists - yet the bravado that the same can occur.

0 Replies

ElDiablo, All my siblings are Christians, and my older brother was saying the same thing about charity and not telling anybody. I think that's one of the most ridiculous teachings from the bible; there are too many aspects to charity that requires wide-spread exposure. One needs to work for a charity to understand what I mean, but basically, less than one percent give "anonymously."

0 Replies

Quote:

I see massive groups of theists doing mission work - giving millions to the poor - setting up outreach programs - and so on.

There is a flip side to all this, of course. Conversion of non-believers. The money given to the poor comes at a price; belief.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Quote:

ElDiablo, All my siblings are Christians, and my older brother was saying the same thing about charity and not telling anybody. I think that's one of the most ridiculous teachings from the bible; there are too many aspects to charity that requires wide-spread exposure. One needs to work for a charity to understand what I mean, but basically, less than one percent give "anonymously."

The verse doesnt talk about "anonymously giving" but rather giving for outward appearance. Thinkfactory is almost implying a "Look what WE do compared to what YOU do. Look how charitable WE are; look at how much WE theists do" flaunting their charitableness like it made them more virtuous than others. That is what the bible verse is talking about (and condemning) and its a good lesson.

0 Replies

El, The problem with that interpretation is the fact that it judges other's motivations for their giving. It's a nonsequitur.

0 Replies

Have atheists redefined science to get rid of God?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know