Some history.
When I was a youth I was definitely an Athiest. I firmly believed in science and everything it said and therefore firmly disbelieved in everything "non-scientific". In my university years I swung round and determined that I could no longer justify my level of faith in Athieism so became Agnostic. This was very much a reaction to some groups with Athieism who have a blind faith in science and rigorously defend their ideals against any dissagreement.
To me science is a tool, it does not define what reality is, it attempts to describe what reality is. Even more so in a number of situations science actively gets reality wrong so as to be a more useful tool for some purposes. My issue was with some people (especially in popular science) who think science defines reality. When a contrary theory comes along they argue the strength of their theories without adequately investigating the new alternatives. I am not saying you have to believe all new information you see, just have a willingness to read and interpret it.
Now with further self analysis I think I was understating my beliefs by saying I was agnostic. I am definitely an athiest. If you ask my "Is there a soul" or "does GOD exist" I'll say no. But... I am not an agressive evangelical athiest trying to convert others to my cause, I also am not so rooted in my faith to not see the reality in front of me. I would like to believe that if some personal experience of GOD occured for me that I would be receptive to it, and while I say these things don't exist, I'm more than willing to discuss the "What if they did?" and wouldn't feel unduly shocked to find out that I've been wrong all this time.
I think the problem may partly be that generally Athiesm isn't described as a faith, and further to that because it's not a faith it is not subdivided into smaller specific groups. So lets reclassify things (for me... you guys do what you like) Athiesm is a faith, just like Christianity or Islam. Further, within Athiesm there are varying degrees of belief and groups people belong to. There are the fundamentalist evangelical missions attempting to convert the world to Athiesm, but similarly there are the non-church going athiests who are happy to sit at home with their beliefs and live among all the other faiths of the world in harmony.
So, I'm off to continue my life of quiet, non-confrontational, apathetic belief.
When I was a youth I was definitely an Athiest. I firmly believed in science and everything it said and therefore firmly disbelieved in everything "non-scientific". In my university years I swung round and determined that I could no longer justify my level of faith in Athieism so became Agnostic. This was very much a reaction to some groups with Athieism who have a blind faith in science and rigorously defend their ideals against any dissagreement.
To me science is a tool, it does not define what reality is, it attempts to describe what reality is. Even more so in a number of situations science actively gets reality wrong so as to be a more useful tool for some purposes. My issue was with some people (especially in popular science) who think science defines reality. When a contrary theory comes along they argue the strength of their theories without adequately investigating the new alternatives. I am not saying you have to believe all new information you see, just have a willingness to read and interpret it.
Now with further self analysis I think I was understating my beliefs by saying I was agnostic. I am definitely an athiest. If you ask my "Is there a soul" or "does GOD exist" I'll say no. But... I am not an agressive evangelical athiest trying to convert others to my cause, I also am not so rooted in my faith to not see the reality in front of me. I would like to believe that if some personal experience of GOD occured for me that I would be receptive to it, and while I say these things don't exist, I'm more than willing to discuss the "What if they did?" and wouldn't feel unduly shocked to find out that I've been wrong all this time.
I think the problem may partly be that generally Athiesm isn't described as a faith, and further to that because it's not a faith it is not subdivided into smaller specific groups. So lets reclassify things (for me... you guys do what you like) Athiesm is a faith, just like Christianity or Islam. Further, within Athiesm there are varying degrees of belief and groups people belong to. There are the fundamentalist evangelical missions attempting to convert the world to Athiesm, but similarly there are the non-church going athiests who are happy to sit at home with their beliefs and live among all the other faiths of the world in harmony.
So, I'm off to continue my life of quiet, non-confrontational, apathetic belief.
