View Single Post
Old 2008-02-17, 17:29   Link #322
It's the year 3030...
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spaceport Colony Sicilia
Age: 34
Originally Posted by Blizzer View Post
Discuss your beliefs in a negative light? you mean absence of belief surely?
I would hardly call myself morally virtuous as I said I am not a strict follower of Christianity but I was merely responding to the patronizing attitude of most non-believers. What I said before is correct, followers of religion will seek salvation through virtue, most religions believe this is the path to God, will an agnostic or athestic person strive to follow this attitude as fervently? probably not.

What you have said makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, in science something can be proven definitive and years later another scientist will disprove it with his own theory, scientific fact is not fact. It is as someone said science is one of the better explanations.

You are right in saying it works for religion as well as science that second hand knowledge isn't always truth but faith in God and in salvation is something that I think benefits people positively, as does science, but religion also gives people hope, guidance and solace.
This will be my last response about this particular exchange:

First of all, because I don't believe in god, does not mean I lack a set of beliefs. Please do not try to patronize me, or lift up yourself, by saying that I subscribe to a "lack of beliefs."

Secondly, I don't think Vexx was at all patronizing, nor was I. Again, I cannot speak for him, but I was merely trying to point out the flaws in your original statement, which included far too many assumptions and blanket statements. And here you retort with yet another blanket statement. Therein lies my third point.

I try to live a virtuous life day by day, as I'm sure you do as well. However, religious and non-religious people might choose to do so for different reasons. I choose to make a daily attempt at virtue and kindness, because I believe that what you give, so shall you receive (Jesus said something about that, I think..."Do unto others as you would have done unto you."). A religious person might do the same, in the hopes that their actions would lead to the salvation of their soul. Since I do not believe in an afterlife, my soul has no need for salvation. It's as simple as that.

Next, you are correct to say that many scientific facts are proven wrong as the years progress. However, that does not make them incorrect for the time they are true. Concurrently, religion may have as many "points of fact" that would be false after the fact, but none of that could be proven because no one can report from the afterlife. In that respect, people who find comfort and stake belief in science do so because it is a tangible knowledge, whereas religion requires, even in the smallest amount, a blind faith in what will occur. That is not meant to slight religion in any way, it is simply a matter of fact. Some call it a leap of faith, I choose to use a different definition.

Lastly, the hope, guidance and solace argument makes sense. However, someone who does not believe in the existence of a supreme being, or who questions that existence, might not necessarily look for those feelings in that particular place. Religion isn't the only place to get hope, guidance and solace.
Likewise, science is not the only place for those feelings either. The key is to find a belief structure that allows you those feelings, while still being able to maintain tolerance for people who find those feelings in a different way.
Quzor is offline   Reply With Quote