3 ms·

> such as the ‘New Atheists’ – to assert that the disproofs of God None of the atheists I know try to disprove all gods because they're generally collections o

> such as the ‘New Atheists’ – to assert that the disproofs of God None of the atheists I know try to disprove all gods because they're generally collections of unfalsifiable claims. Specific gods as claimed to exist by specific groups, yes, but generally no. > [to assert that] the secular science that they claim to be doing are value-neutral, apolitical and objective How strange that science can't be neutral because someone's introduced a god. It couldn't be that person's god making the science non-neutral and political now, could it? I dare say (tongue in cheek) that the proof of that is obvious through mere observation.

keane 4y ago
> None of the atheists I know… Anecdotal and unfamiliar with the literature. >How strange that science can’t be neutral because someone… That’s not what the article implies in the slightest. Nor is it why science is unable to be objective.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
shakna 4y ago
> None of the atheists I know try to disprove all gods because they're generally collections of unfalsifiable claims. Specific gods as claimed to exist by specific groups, yes, but generally no. "New Atheism" as a term, _requires_ it. It isn't simply atheism, but rather a form that advocates for an intolerance of all religion. Whilst it doesn't require that you advocate for particular disproof against individual gods, as it may make use of all-encompassing arguments, it does requires that the concept of gods being disproved.