Studying Atheism
Regarding your comments on 1st video, I would like to clarify one thing. Asking religion to answer how matter came into existence, how matter became alive etc. is similar to asking science to prove existence of consciousness, morality and justice. Religion’s primary point of discussion is the ‘ Why ‘ of human existence, while science focuses on ‘ How ‘ of material world. But Quran, while discussing this ‘ Why ‘ actually touches the topic of ‘ How ‘ in some instances e.g. creation of human beings, creation of the universe and the end of times. Thus combining the ‘ Whys ‘ and ‘ Hows ‘ of Quran, one gets a complete set of ideology, one complete loop if you will, without any open-ends. Atheism on the other hand, cannot be termed as a complete set of beliefs or a complete ideology. Quran does discuss how human creation happened and what gave him the consciousness, and what is it that we can find through observation and experimentation and what is beyond the reach of our knowledge. Similarly, the reason for billions of galaxies has been explained and how it will all end i.e. through creation of a new universe; just to name a few.
Brother Wudud, can u give an example where science proved something and rejected by sanity check? I am not discussing this term, sanity check, in order to keep the discussion centered around atheism Atheism isn’t science alone. It involves all human faculties of thought, science is only a tool of discovery of facts. If god doesn’t exist then it is pointless to discuss His attributes or afterlife Consciousness is very well under the scope of science, psychology, it involves psychological experiments coupled with neuroimaging techniques. A scholar told of this website, ilhaad.com, found this article by Ahmed Javed. Very good read, plz do take sometime out to read it, at least part 1 https://ilhaad.com/2018/04/maghribi-challenges/
I am not saying sanity check can disapprove science, rather I am saying science is its subset and has a much smaller domain.
Again brother, what is your proof of this sanity check u mentioned? If it’s bigger than science then there should be an example where sanity check superseded science If sanity check doesn’t go against science then why do we need it? Whatever science proves is fact and that’s it! I am strictly speaking about human knowledge and not including any revelation in it My aim is to show you that all such things like rationality, logic philosophy etc sounds good but when u attempt to test it against objective reasoning aka science, every human effort fails to explain it using same logic philosophy rationality.