It's interesting that as a supposedly atheist message, the poster reads there's "probably" no God. Most rational non-believers, including Dawkins, accept that a true atheistic position (ie I am convinced there is no God) is illogical. That's because science works on statistical probabilities rather than absolutes, and you can't prove a negative. Therefore, entrenched, self affirmed atheists face a real challenge not just from believers but by the science itself. Agnosticism is much more rational. I have had this discussion with friends who have proclaimed their fundamental atheism, on numerous occasions. It doesn't make them believers, but it makes them question their conviction.
1 comment:
It's interesting that as a supposedly atheist message, the poster reads there's "probably" no God. Most rational non-believers, including Dawkins, accept that a true atheistic position (ie I am convinced there is no God) is illogical. That's because science works on statistical probabilities rather than absolutes, and you can't prove a negative. Therefore, entrenched, self affirmed atheists face a real challenge not just from believers but by the science itself. Agnosticism is much more rational. I have had this discussion with friends who have proclaimed their fundamental atheism, on numerous occasions. It doesn't make them believers, but it makes them question their conviction.
Post a Comment