Create an account
Most Reputable Members

Science-Religion Debate: Replying to New Atheism

You have contributed 0.0% of this topic

Thread Tools
Post New Topic Filter by poster  
Topic Appreciation
Appreciate
The following members appreciate this topic: Yasin, abu mohammed
Abdur Rahman ibn Awf
Rank Image
Offline
Joined:
6th Oct 2014
Longevity:
0%
Location:
Unspecified
Posts:
1518
Gender:
Brother
Reputation:
2379
#1 [Permalink] Posted on 2nd August 2016 16:06
The Cult of New Atheism and its philosophies, seems to be gaining traction Amongst Muslim University graduates... Abu Aaliya has a few good articles in response to the arguments of the proponents of Atheism, and Evolution.


Science-Religion Debate: Replying to New Atheism

By Abu Aaliya.

‘Atheism,’ writes John Lennox, Professor of Mathematics at the University of Oxford, ‘is on the march in the Western world. Noisily. A concerted attempt is being made to marshal the atheist faithful, to encourage them not to be ashamed of their atheism but to stand up and fight as a united army. The enemy is God.’1

If New Atheists are to be believed, science has dispensed with [belief in] God. Atheism is, its high priests and sermonisers tell us, the only viable intellectual position for the modern thinking person. Science and religion cannot be reconciled, they say. In fact, the following has become part and parcel of New Atheism’s central dogma: ‘Whatever knowledge is attainable, must be attained by scientific methods; and what science cannot discover, mankind cannot know.’2

Indeed, the above claim (that science is the only way to the truth and that it can, in principle, explain everything) is the third of three core arguments in New Atheism’s march against God. The first one being: that science explains how things work, so we don’t need to invoke God as an explanation. The second one: that there is nothing but nature. It’s a closed system of cause and effect. There isn’t a realm of the divine or the supernatural. There is no ‘outside’. This, in a nutshell, is the crux of the science versus religion debate.

Richard Dawkins, who continues to lead New Atheism’s assault on theism or belief in God, has a rather appropriate maxim in this regard. He states: ‘Next time somebody tells you that something is true, why not say to them: “what kind of evidence is there for that?” And if they can’t give you a good answer, I hope you’ll think carefully before you believe a word they say.’3 So let’s take each of these three beliefs of New Atheism and explore just how grounded in evidence or proof they really are:

♦ Read The rest of the article here..! thehumblei.com/2016/07/

report post quote code quick quote reply
Like x 2
Winner x 1
Site Support
Please DONATE generously towards Muftisays

We spend hundreds of hours ensuring you receive a quality service from this site. We do not fall into the advertisement schemes as all the ads contain elements of Haraam including Haraam Islamic links. Please consider setting up a £1 monthly donation. May Allah (swt) reward you.

Yasin
Yasin's avatar
Joined:
9th Sep 2004
Longevity:
100%
Location:
London, UK
Posts:
5285
Gender:
Brother
Reputation:
198
#2 [Permalink] Posted on 2nd August 2016 16:58
Quote:
Take, for instance, an iPod. Now just because one deciphers the inner workings of an iPod, iPhone or iPad, does not mean that it is impossible to believe in the existence of Steve Jobs as the designer of such culturally altering tech. This would be a failure to distinguish between mechanism and agency. ‘Because we know the mechanism that explains a phenomenon, there is therefore no agent that designed the mechanism’ is a logical fallacy; in philosophy, an elemental category mistake.


Some great stuff.... worth the read
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
Back to top Post New Topic