The "outcome" of mortal life is mortal death. Perhaps it's not entirely wasteful to ponder whether or not humans potentially embody some eternal spiritual component as well. Because if we don't, then hell... let's just party like it's 1999.
Originally Posted By: sandbox
Have we as a species found more or less evidence to validate the claims that are taught by faith based endeavors?
But isn't it obvious that: once claims are validated -- they are no longer "based on faith"? Anyway, which claim(s) are you seeking to validate?
Originally Posted By: sandbox
From my perspective there is a constant flow of data to refute most Abrahamic theory for example.
Too vague. Pick something specific that was refuted and then a suitable response can be formulated.
Originally Posted By: sandbox
In the logical world this line of study would be discounted for lack of evidence and common sense. There is plenty of documentation of failed mystical theory going back to the Titans, Caves, or Pagans when the Gods were feminine.
Uh huh... but science OTOH has been pristine and error-free, lo these many centuries. Remember blood-letting? How would you like to be sick back in the good old days and hear the physician say: "Aha, you have fever? We drain 5 quarts blood... that oughta cool you down."
Originally Posted By: sandbox
The issue needs to be addressed because science is causing the edges to fray, and we need to have a logical plan to deal with it as it unravels.
Science is causing the edges to fray? There are several schools of thought on that as well. (I mentioned "The Tao of Physics" on an earlier page. So, there is at least one physicist who sees that matter from a different perspective).
Originally Posted By: sandbox
The theory builds armies and discounts women, while trying to capture the moral high ground.
Oh i see, so all non-atheistic individuals are accountable for the political aspirations of a bunch of chauvinist whackos? Sweeping generalization or what?
Originally Posted By: sandbox
The issue, as I see it, was that faith base reasoning and "Belief" is a mistake. And in demonstrating why it is and then showing what can be done to reverse the mistake would make this thread useful.
Well, what can i say? "Sorry my previous reply demonstrated you were guilty of virtually the same presuppositions and prejudices as you claim the opposite camp to be." ?
