And if that was the sum total of an atheist account of the world...
... it would be shit.
But it isn't.
And just because atheists have trouble explaining the origin of the universe, it doesn't follow that a theist account is better - or even as good. It isn't. The problem remains, but with a much higher metaphysical price.
I will believe in anything for which there is evidence and a good argument. Until then, I will not believe it. I think that that's in intellectual good taste.
At the same time, I will point out fallacies in others' accounts. That's a legitimate move as well.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 24 Oct 2008, 14:39,
Reply)
hey hey hey,
you're preaching to the converted.
i'm merely pointting out that you can't just say "oh i'm supposed to believe in some guy floating around in the sky made the world" because to be honest, what's provable? to a believer, god is provable, by the strength he gives them and by the way he makes them feel.
to a non believer science is provable, but only by the measures of science.
EDIT: and i'm aware that's not the sum total of atheist thinking but im summarising to assist my point, that both sides will never quite believe/understand the other, that's a fundamental fact, and arguing about it hurts too many people.
(
Just Flange, Fri 24 Oct 2008, 14:59,
Reply)