Religious Faith as Evidence, is an Intellectual Reasoning Error

Religious Faith as Evidence, is an Intellectual Reasoning Error   To offer faith as evidence, is to offer an intellectual reasoning error as evidence, as having a large amount of faith or no faith is only a change in feelings not some amount of evidence. Faith is the thing you do when you don’t really want to know. Science is the thing you do when you realize faith is not evidence of any kind it’s biased believing regardless of the evidence. And atheism is the thing you do when one trusts the facts of science and the logical limits of reality because of rationalistic and/or skeptic philosophy is of greater value over the wishful thinking faith without facts most claimed gods and religions seem to demand. Therefore, it must be understood that faith in the acquisition of knowledge is simply not worth believing in. And if you feel it must take faith to see a thing as real you have already admitted such a thing is not part of reality. Literally having faith is strong belief in that which by is very nature, involving a lack of supporting evidence should require strong doubt. Faith is not Reason I don’t doubt faith, as I am saying it’s a non-answer, as it is not proof of any evidence of reality but is generally motivated from some unjustified emotionalism and feelings, it does not help know what is true. Any god is a magical non-natural cause thing (or it’s not then god like) and thus no god is rational.   I don’t reject faith because I am skeptical of its attachment to...

Here is a Little on how I got into Axiology

“Damien, how did you get into axiology?”   Here is a quick explanation even if t seems long, it’s actually longer to fully explain. However, here we go, I got into axiology in college when I was disappointed with my ethics class saying pick the ethics approach you like the best. I thought how do we establish that? And how can it be that we can’t tell which is better more that just because.you like it. So, my wanting to evaluate ethics brought me to meta ethics then from to axiology and I then read a few axiology books, one specifically I read was “The New Science of Axiological Psychology” by Leon Pomeroy. I was interested this because my BA was in psychology and that book had axiology and psychology. I not only was interested in ethics and I also became an atheist because of college classes and I wanted to figure out how to be a person of value and wondered if there was Axiological Atheism and realized there was, though it was mainly only addressed by theists who where saying there is this bad Atheism called Axiological Atheism as they see it as a glorifying of the human and a strong rejection of God even if one was found to be real. I looked for a positive link and found an article “Formal Axiology – Another Victim in Religion’s War on Science” by William Kelleher it further validated me and helped me feel I had someone else to show this thinking which helped me get other atheists to not only see axiology could validate atheistic humanism but...