I feel like they’ve had to accept an outstanding amount of evidence over the hundreds of years, but with the advent of internet circles just feedback loop way harder, except the church isn’t in those loops.
Like it’s just way harder currently to change the mind of someone when they’re instantly surrounded by people who will reinforce your beliefs.
Though I also feel like the more difficult it becomes to change religions, the more likely they are to go away. There’s a lot of thrown away crap that was thrown away because people wouldn’t take it. Religion can’t survive forever on the old.
In these threads I often get the feeling people use “evidence” as a synonyme for “proof”. I think, there can be lots of evidence, even contradicting evidence, without there being a proof.
I find it utterly incomprehensible when people try to offer me evidence to support their religious views. It’s a question of faith, faith doesn’t need evidence.
If you wanna have a belief system, fine, that’s your jam. Don’t pretend there’s evidence for it or borrow the ideas and language from science about evidence and especially when you borrow those ideas wrong.
I absolutely agree with you, but the same goes the other way. Atheists bashing (moderately) religious people for their faith and labelling them as dumb and believing in fairy tales, assuming they use their (i.e. scientific) language and approaches. I’m not a religious person myself but even I can comprehend that moral code is written differently and that religion tries to not only answer, but also ask completely different questions from science.
Absolutely!
My view.
Belief systems are not held up to standards of reasonableness nor require evidence.
And they should also not be used to make decisions which need to be evidence based.
accurate af
I mean, not really. If you built a wall of kryptonite Supes would never get through. But many religious pass through a wall of evidence and never even notice it’s there.
