Test Everything Before Belief

So as to stop us diviating from the original thread I made a new one quoting your latest post and let us carry on:

Quixotic said:

Then you are satisfied by living your life by assumptions, faith.

I am not.

The reason for this is that there are many people who claim to 'know', different, contradicting things through faith. Only 1 or none of these claims can be true.

Using evidence and testing claims is the only way to gain real knowledge about the world.

How do you decide what is correct when two things disagree? Are you really satisfied with simply assuming that what you currently believe is true and not testing these assumptions?

if you were born in a different part of the world or different time, and had the same attitude you would believe in the Jesus as a God, or Vishnu, Thore or Zeus.

Regards

Click to expand...

You've jumped the gun, now this was my post:

Al Habeshi said:

Ok, so now we have a context, these things need to be known to be true or not for a Muslim.

I would reply that they do not, I do not hold that every single ayota of my faith should be proven scientifically/historically (i.e. with a measurement of authority used by some). The question then arises, why?

Why do you think everything should be proven?

And Why do I not?

I hold that I do not need everything to be proven right, in this circumstance, because I hold the opinion that the teaching comes from God, if, now this is the crucial if, as I hold, the teaching came from God, then I can fully trust it without the need of checking everything, 1.Because I trust God, 2.Because I do not have the same ability at hand which God has through which He Knows and I do not.

Click to expand...

I set a context, you need to clarify whether in this situation you would agree with my principle? If you held, for whatever reasons we may discuss later, that God told you something, and you trusted this God who had more knowledge than you then would you trust Him?

Depending on the answer the discussion will more different ways bro.

Eesa

Good idea changing to a new thread btw.

Well you have backed me into a corner - if you believed God had spoken to you / what you were reading was from God, then yes you would assume what it said was correct.

However my point is: why would you believe God had spoken to you / what you are reading is sent from God.

Does this answer your question?

Regards

Quixotic said:

Good idea changing to a new thread btw.

Well you have backed me into a corner - if you believed God had spoken to you / what you were reading was from God, then yes you would assume what it said was correct.

However my point is: why would you believe God had spoken to you / what you are reading is sent from God.

Does this answer your question?

Regards

Click to expand...

Ok, the reason I 'backed' you in a corner, was to see if we had that same foundation, i.e. that we would believe/trust God if we had the view that He had spoken to us.

Now, you rightly ask, well, what makes one think that you are right and the others wrong and why would you think that what you have is from God, right?

Exactly, there are many such texts / people who claim to have messages from God.

None of which have any credibility more than any other.

Whether a given person believe in it depends most on where and when they were born and the culture they were born into.

My tolerance level for believing something is true is much higher than purely arbitrary means such as the above, I think it is important to test the propositions rigorously.

In this way we now have a body of knowledge which has allowed us to get to the moon, rid ourselves of many diseases, see into the furthest corners of the universe and have an understanding of our universe which is far boarder, deeper and more accurate than any ancient text claiming to be the word of a God has been able to give us.

The difference can be measured on many orders of magnitude.

1-How does going to the moon and curing disease gratify ones desire for spiritual fulfillment or deal with things that lack a material body even as far as science is concerned?

2-One text not being better than the next, is really a matter of being read on the subjects..

3-I too can reach many conclusions with very general applications.. painting the world with a broad brush is not very developed but is very common place to atheism and to be honest sort of banal!

cheers

1) Not having small pox, due to it being wiped out by vaccines i think is very important in 'spiritual development'

There is wonder and amazement in science; it offers far better explanations of everything, with more depth, beauty and 'spiritual development' than any and all holy books combined.

Science does have a lot to say on what you call things lacking a material body, mathematics, physics, the mind, many things which don’t have a physical existence. Again all of it much more in depth and broad than any holy book offers.

Even the scientific principals of questioning and testing has lead to many gains in society, such as freedom of speech, equality for women, freedom of religion, the right to protest and disagree with government. This questioning has lead to a much higher standard of morals by those who do question, not under the threat of punishment, but purely for the sake of doing the right thing because it is right.

And above everything it offers a way of finding the truth, not just assuming you already know what is true.

The truth is very important to me.

2) So if they are all as accurate as each other, it hesitates they are all wrong as they all disagree. So why choose one over another?

I am well read on the subjects, just not convinced by any of their arguments do due lack of evidence, logic or sound reasoning.

3) I don’t know what you mean? What specifically would you like me to state? I think I have been fairly specific in my statements, and where they are general, they are true for the general case too.

(Note: I say 'spiritual' because it is a very vague statement and I’m not sure what you mean - plus it infers some sort of soul / spirit, for which there is no evidence or reason to believe)

Now, it should be noted that I am neither a scholar of Islam nor a person of knowledge in Islam, nor an eloquent Muslim. So if what I say does not seem convincing nor stimulating, it is most likely due to my lack of abilty than lack of truth in Islam.

Quixotic said:

Exactly, there are many such texts / people who claim to have messages from God.

None of which have any credibility more than any other.

Whether a given person believe in it depends most on where and when they were born and the culture they were born into.

My tolerance level for believing something is true is much higher than purely arbitrary means such as the above, I think it is important to test the propositions rigorously.

In this way we now have a body of knowledge which has allowed us to get to the moon, rid ourselves of many diseases, see into the furthest corners of the universe and have an understanding of our universe which is far boarder, deeper and more accurate than any ancient text claiming to be the word of a God has been able to give us.

The difference can be measured on many orders of magnitude.

Click to expand...

From the above statement I can thus derive this:

Many people/books/religion claim to be true. We have to test these claims, from my testing no one of these religions/people/books have more credabilty than the other.

The question arises, what methodology have you utilised in your testing?

Quixotic said:

1) Not having small pox, due to it being wiped out by vaccines i think is very important in 'spiritual development'

There is wonder and amazement in science; it offers far better explanations of everything, with more depth, beauty and 'spiritual development' than any and all holy books combined.

Science does have a lot to say on what you call things lacking a material body, mathematics, physics, the mind, many things which don’t have a physical existence. Again all of it much more in depth and broad than any holy book offers.

Even the scientific principals of questioning and testing has lead to many gains in society, such as freedom of speech, equality for women, freedom of religion, the right to protest and disagree with government. This questioning has lead to a much higher standard of morals by those who do question, not under the threat of punishment, but purely for the sake of doing the right thing because it is right.

And above everything it offers a way of finding the truth, not just assuming you already know what is true.

The truth is very important to me.

2) So if they are all as accurate as each other, it hesitates they are all wrong as they all disagree. So why choose one over another?

I am well read on the subjects, just not convinced by any of their arguments do due lack of evidence, logic or sound reasoning.

3) I don’t know what you mean? What specifically would you like me to state? I think I have been fairly specific in my statements, and where they are general, they are true for the general case too.

(Note: I say 'spiritual' because it is a very vague statement and I’m not sure what you mean - plus it infers some sort of soul / spirit, for which there is no evidence or reason to believe)

Click to expand...

I don't have much time today to dance around all this crap, probably not until the weekend is over and even then I wouldn't wish to labor over a protracted message that seems to convey no meaning!...I skimmed over your post, as it is predictable for the most part...

There is No choosing between science and religion.. the two live harmoniously together and the two are very much twined...

very quickly, to give the anaology of someone who works dilligently, because work is needed, to butter his bread, to foster his family, to construct a purpose for his life to acquire a respected social status in his community.. but if he doesn't take any time to vacation, on the account vacations are wasteful and non-conducive to progress and don't in fact butter bread and are a waste of money.. but if he doesn't address his need to relax, his work will suffer, his family will suffer his body will suffer...

I happen to have have been privilleged as to spend the last 12-13 years of my life doing science, I do know that science doesn't have the answer to everything!.. I'd refrain on speaking on behalf of the entire scientific community, and just keep that ebullience as far as you are concerned....

I also happen to be a woman and know that it wasn't science that granted me my freedom to vote, or obligation to learn or aspire, but it was/is my religious duty.. so that is another area where I'd refrain from speaking so freely!

as for 'spirituality'... how can I explain that to an android? there is no scientific measure.. anymore than there is a measure for your 'feelers' being hurt or eleated by some of the posts shared here. It is however innate to all of us and will not be denied although you can chanel it to the station of your choosing!
The same way we are born knowing how to cry or suckle without being taught, that it is a measure to express some primal needs and emotions

Enjoy atheism to the fullest.. it is freeing from obligations!

cheers

heres to evil atheism.. woot.. not ill go kill someone...

as always.. your comments serve an edifying purpose and are virtually appealing.. It is good to micturate/bless every thread with various atheist stuff and other nonesense--
I don't know how otherwise this forum would survive without it!

cheers