On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 2:38 PM, malcymo <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes the atheist has made the same leap of faith that the theist has > made and only the agnostic is protecting his views with rational > argument. > > I suppose that the choice between theism and atheism will always be a > leap of faith. For me it is just a matter of what seems most credible > but could change. > > The important question, I suppose, is whether or not, theism is, on > balance good for nature or not. >
I would say that nature probably doesn't care. The real impact is on society and the individual. With individuals I think it depends on the person. Some people just need to feel like their belief systems are on a solid foundation irregardless of the fact that there is rot in the core - namely a flawed rationale. Some just can't accept that life is exactly what it appears to be and so ignore the shaky underpinnings of their beliefs in the hope that if they keep their eyes closed it makes the end of their existence unreal. Others reject the possibility of continued existence after death for fear of retribution by a vengeful god. The reasons for theism and atheism are many and varied. My point is that to consider the good and bad of theism and atheism you have to consider their reasons and the impact that they have on the individual and society in general. I would say that for some individuals a belief system that supports their needs is a good thing regardless of the rationale that it is built on. It gives meaning to their lives and provides a crutch for them to lean on. Often I wish I could lean on beliefs like that. I personally struggle through life trying to find purpose were there is none. For me there is no purpose in life other than the urge to spawn. That's a pretty depressing thought but unfortunately, I'm just not capable of viewing the universe any other way.
