Quote:
|
However. Saying that atheism is a belief is like saying that a statement like "There are no pink elephants on the backside of Neptune is a belief, too. What we know is that there is not the smallest reason whatever to assume that there are pink elephants on the dark side of Neptune. To claim this scepticism already is a belief, would give the term "belief" such an inflationary diversity of possible contexts and meanings, that the term by that is rendered meaningless, since it could mean all and everything, then.
|
Indeed, while I fall on the side of the atheist, I believe this point to be wrong. We can reasonably assume there are no pink elephants on the dark side of Neptune through science and observation. The same does not lend itself to the concept of God or a creator.
In fact, one of the biggest problems of modern physics is the misnomer applied to the so-called "Big Bang" event, which is the phrase "Big Bang Theory". In reality, calling such event a "theory" is misleading as it precludes any explanation of "why". Now, there are currently some very promising leads attempting to explain the cause of the creation of our universe (M-theory being the standout), but still - we have only a loose collection of mathematics and little experimentally verified data to support such postulations.
In other words, on the question of creation (and subsequentally, a Creator), ANYTHING and EVERYTHING is a belief.
Hell, modern physics even lends itself to the LIKELIHOOD of INFINITE POSSIBILITIES, which would not preclude a creator. There are even postulations of M-theory and experiments planned that include the CREATION of other universes.
The fact is that, beyond the observable data (things within the 13.7 billion years following the Big Bang), we simply have no solid idea. Whereas, scientifically, we do KNOW that there is minimal likelihood of ANY kind of elephant on Neptune.
Personally, I believe that any Creator was likely random chance, such as the intersection of two parallel "membranes" in our universe. Yet I have no data whatsoever to support that idea - only pretty mathematics (which are still incomplete). That's a belief, and is no more or less valid than the idea of an intelligent creator, in my opinion.
I simply disagree with the theist. I don't assign any burden of proof (as though that's anyone onus to assign in the first place), I don't look down my nose, and I don't disparage any other belief. I merely disagree.