Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button
Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post
Login
Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
I Suppose The Problem Is One Of Semantics

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Mario Dovalina on September 27, 2001 17:33:52 UTC

When I say I'm an atheist, I don't say I have belief in no God, so much as no belief in God. I think a lot of people, when thinking of atheism, automatically assume it is a positive statement about the outside world. For me, at least, it's not.

I first started considering myself an atheist when I began breaking from dogmatic theism, when I was 13, and I basically saw 2 ends of the spectrum: Fundamentalist and Atheist. That is, unless you are on either extreme, you're decieving yourself. If you're religious but not a fundamentalist, you selectively choose your what scripture you believe, which I viewed as hypocrisy. But if you're not religious and you're not an atheist, you're ignoring the implications your lack of belief suggests.

I moved away from this polarized view of theology, especially in light of agnosticism and nondogmatic theism, both of which have some good points on their side. Still, when I call myself an atheist now it's probably a side-effect of my simpler previous world-view.

A large problem I see with atheism vs. theism is that the very subject in question (God) is seldom defined. For example, Harv makes a number of nearly irrefutable arguments for the existence of some "divine order." While I don't agree with all of the conclusions he reaches, I agree that a mathematical order external to (or independent of) the universe probably does exist. Harv claims that makes me a theist. I don't see how. I can only suggest that it's a semantic difference: Harv views God as any underlying principle/order to the universe. I'm a lot more restrictive. I require sentience. That is more or less it. If it ain't sentient, it ain't divine. And personally I think self-awareness is a lot to ask for from a "divine order," no matter how influential and powerful it is. So, in short, I see room for God as far as mathemtical order/purpose goes, but no room for God as far as a sentient Creator goes.

So I may not be an atheist in the philosophical sense of the word. And I don't consider myself a theist (since I use the term God conservatively) Agnosticism essentially means "We can not know if God exists." I don't believe that. I believe that if God IS out there, somewhere, he isn't impossible to detect. That is, with enough information we can know anything.

So I suppose I'm simply a steadfast Dovalinist.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins