Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Cboldt
Y'all are a bit wordy. My simple point was that faith-based religion doesn't lend itself to scientific analysis. Therefore, the non-falsifiability test isn't useful to debunk a faith-based religion.

Sounds right. Is it that simple?

Consider whether all knowledge is of the same kind or not. tame thinks it isn't when he says people believe with rational evidence. That seems right. I shudder to think this reason thingy to be so totalitarian.

80 posted on 04/06/2003 4:11:12 PM PDT by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]


To: cornelis
Consider whether all knowledge is of the same kind or not. tame thinks it isn't when he says people believe with rational evidence. That seems right. I shudder to think this reason thingy to be so totalitarian.

Faith is belief without proof. Faith is not "knowledge." Most believers bolster their faith with a reasoning process, but at the very bottom, there is faith, and only faith.

If a "scientific" proof is possible, if a reasoned analysis based on unimpeachable observation can conclude with proof that your religion is correct, then your religion is not faith-based.

It's a definition thing. Change the words to suit your own preferences.

84 posted on 04/06/2003 4:22:11 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson