I like it when Gnu leaders actually try to define their favorite words. For example, when Jerry Coyne defined science for us, we got to see he was morphing back and forth between two different definitions. Sneaky, sneaky. Now, he is going to tell us about faith and reason:
No we dont have faith in reason and science in the same way as “Cru” members have faith in God. I see “faith” according to Walter Kaufmann’s definition: strong belief in propositions for which there is insufficient evidence to command the assent of every reasonable person.
Well, that’s how I see faith also. I think Coyne thinks I’m supposed to be seeing faith as some form of “let’s pretend!” He is, after all, a man who needs his straw men.
We have confidence in science because it has led us to provisional truths—it works.
Sure. But it doesn’t work when it comes to telling us whether or not God exists, unless, of course, you build your worldview on God-of-the-Gaps arguments. We can tell it doesn’t work by the simple fact that neither Coyne, nor Myers, nor Dawkins have conducted a single scientific experiment to determine if God exists and published their results.
Cru doesn’t even know if there’s any God, or, if there is a divine presence, that it’s the Abrahamic god rather than the Hindu god, Yahweh, or Wotan.
Yes, I don’t know. But Christianity works for me.
And we use reason in the same way: it leads us to truth. Revelation, dogma, and authority do not, for if they did there would be only one religion rather than thousands with their disparate and often conflicting doctrines.
This one is funny. When I look at the atheist community, I see all sorts of disparate and often conflicting doctrines. Recently, I highlighted this fact with the atheist infighting about guns. So what’s the truth here, Jerry? And what about the ever ongoing debate about feminism and atheism? Instead of ignoring its existence, why doesn’t Coyne use reason to show the whole atheist community the truth about this issue? Well?
I’m always amazed by how the Gnu atheists think they have some form of intellectually superior outlook on the world when in reality, they wallow in delusions about themselves and others.