Science is not a belief system...

[_beastie]

What comfort does atheism give you when you are old, frail and about to die? Does it help mourn for you when you have lost a spouse or a child? Does it celebrate with you the momentous events in your life? Does it help you survive adversity?

I'll echo what monkeys replied to this - I can't force myself to believe in something, and I'm suspicious of those who claim they have successfully done so. in my opinion, if you have to "choose" to believe something, there isn't enough evidence to just believe in it due to the strength of the evidence. Now, of course, I could pretend to believe, but why?

The comfort religion can bring demonstrates how it is evolutionarily useful, but has nothing to do with whether or not its truth claims are valid.

[_truth dancer]

Yes, I would agree that the paradise of Islam and the paradise of Mormonism are almost identical,

One blaring exception... women get the forty virgins as well! ;-)

I heard it straight out of the mouth of an Imam.

;-)

~dancer~

[Alf'Omega]

What comfort does atheism give you when you are old, frail and about to die? Does it help mourn for you when you have lost a spouse or a child? Does it celebrate with you the momentous events in your life? Does it help you survive adversity?

I'll echo what monkeys replied to this - I can't force myself to believe in something, and I'm suspicious of those who claim they have successfully done so. in my opinion, if you have to "choose" to believe something, there isn't enough evidence to just believe in it due to the strength of the evidence. Now, of course, I could pretend to believe, but why?

The comfort religion can bring demonstrates how it is evolutionarily useful, but has nothing to do with whether or not its truth claims are valid.

Not to derail the thread, but I don't think there's any doubt that people choose what to believe all the time, but it can't be done consciously. There's no other valid or serious way to explain how so many people believe in Mormonism, for instance.

When you say "due to the strength of the evidence" you have to keep in mind that people tend to give greater weight to evidence that supports their beliefs and lesser to that which contradicts. Confirmation bias and all that.

We believe what is (unconsciously) most comfortable for us to believe.

[_Nephi]

Religion is not a tool to a reliable truth claim.

For the individual, it is a reliable tool for truth claims of spirituality for the individual. It is not for reality, though.

I could just as easily declare that you would never follow Mormonism if you weren't promised that you could become a god one day. What greater glory is there than THAT promise?

I am a follower of Mormonism because it teaches that you never give up, that there is no final goal... Yes, the could declare that, but, well. Fine, I can concede that they did it for their own spiritual nature, however, I believe if your spiritual nature requires the halt or changing the spiritual path of another, chances are the pathway you are choosing is not correct.

[_SatanWasSetUp]

I agree for the most part with the premise. Science is a tool for observing the material universe. Spirituality is by its very definition outside the realm of science. Religion isn't about spirituality or science, it's simply men telling people what to believe. Mormonism isn't scientific nor spiritual, it's simply a group of people who choose to obey a small group of men. Basically, it's a fan club.

[_marg]

Religion is not a tool to a reliable truth claim.

For the individual, it is a reliable tool for truth claims of spirituality for the individual. It is not for reality, though.

I was contrasting religion with science. A claim is akin to a conclusion, a theory, a decision. In science, accepted theories gain reliability. You pointed this out yourself, theories can be used to predict results. And with repeated successful outcome predictions one develops an appreciation that the theory is reliable. Now if an individual claims a scientific theory which can not be duplicated or only on occasion can, it is not going to be considered reliable by any objective standard, based upon the say so of the claimant.

Look at the def'n of reliable from answers.com

re·li·a·ble
adj.
-Capable of being relied on; dependable: a reliable assistant; a reliable car.
-Yielding the same or compatible results in different clinical experiments or statistical trials.


As I wrote about religion, claims of truth are anyone's guess. There is no established reliability in claims of the spiritual. What exactly do you mean by spiritual? Is it something beyond the experiences generated by your mind? If not, then it is emotions and perceptions generated by the brain. But you certainly are not clear what "spirituality" is. You claim you met God while tripping on acid. Is this a reliable claim, that you met God? Is it likely the perception generated by taking the drug gave you the sensation of meeting a God rather than it indicating a reality outside your mind, a concept by the way you already had some imaginations of.

Your say so, and anyone else's of their subjective experiences does not make their claims reliable. There needs to be some consensus of objective evaluation. You've not established any reliability with regards to "religion as a reliable tool for truth claims of spirituality". Your sentence/claim is essentially nonsensical.

[_Some Schmo]

Religion isn't about spirituality or science, it's simply men telling people what to believe. Mormonism isn't scientific nor spiritual, it's simply a group of people who choose to obey a small group of men. Basically, it's a fan club.

Well, actually, the church has the manipulation of people's minds down to a science. They certainly have a body of evidence for what works in this regard. Otherwise, it wouldn't be much of a fan club (I like the fan club comment, by the way).