Kialo requires cookies to work correctly.
Does science justify atheism?
(understood as a "lack of belief in god/s").
The scientific method has never provided an answer that leaves no further questions to be asked.
Using a method that isn't able to prove or disprove something's existence isn't a justification to believe or not believe in that something.
Empirical evidence supports the idea of a deity.
Unless people can claim they are in possession of unlimited knowledge, they can never objectively deny the existence of God/gods.
The existence of God falls outside the domain of science.
The simplest explanation for what we don't understand is that "we don't understand yet," not that "there is an all powerful supreme being that is making it happen."
Scientific observation appears to indicate that religion is entirely a human construction.
The default position of any claim should be to not believe something until sufficient evidence is provided. If the default position was reversed then every god must be believed in simultaneously.
Scientific thought contradicts religious teachings about the nature of the cosmos.
Atheism does not require justification. Theism requires justification and has not been justified.
Science provides a qualified justification for atheism, which is that deities are not falsifiable, testable, or empirical; also, it is for a qualified version of atheism, one that is unsure of anything that can't be empirically falsified or tested.
Science works on certain assumptions, one of the key assumptions is positive evidence justifies positive claims. In the absence of positive evidence no claim should be made.
Does Science Leave Room for Free Will?
Is Darwinian Evolution Philosophy or Science?
Can Religious Faith and Science Co-exist?