Faith and Reason Quotes

William K Clifford
“It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.”

Richard Dawkins
“Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence.”

Benjamin Franklin
“The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason.”

William James
“Faith means belief in something concerning which doubt is theoretically possible.”

Søren Kierkegaard
“Certainty... lurks at the door of faith and threatens to devour it.”

Martin Luther
“Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding.”

Blaise Pascal
“Faith certainly tells us what the senses do not, but not the contrary of what they see; it is above, not against them.”

Bertrand Russell
“We may define ‘faith’ as the firm belief in something for which there is no evidence. Where there is evidence, no one speaks of "faith." We do not speak of faith that two and two are four or that the earth is round. We only speak of faith when we wish to substitute emotion for evidence.”

Mark Twain
“Faith is believing what you know ain’t so.”

Voltaire
“Faith consists in believing when it is beyond the power of reason to believe.”

"It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence."
-William Kingdon Clifford


"Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear."
-Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787

When I became convinced that the universe is natural--that all the ghosts and gods are myths, there entered into my brain, into my soul, into every drop of my blood, the sense, the feeling, the joy of freedom. The walls of my prison crumbled and fell, the dungeon was flooded with light, and all the bolts and bars and manacles became dust. I was no longer a servant, a serf, or a slave. There was for me no master in all the wide world--not even in infinite space. I was free--free to think, to express my thoughts--free to live to my own ideal--free to live for myself and those I loved--free to use all my faculties, all my senses--free to spread imagination's wings--free to investigate, to guess and dream and hope--free to judge and determine for myself--free to reject all ignorant and cruel creeds, all the "inspired" books that savages have produced, and all the barbarous legends of the past--free from sanctified mistakes and holy lies--free from the fear of eternal pain-- free from the winged creatures of the night--free from devils, ghosts, and gods. For the first time I was free. There were no prohibited places in all the realms of thought--no air, no space, where fancy could not spread her painted wings--no chains for my limbs--no lashes for my back--no fires for my flesh--no master's frown or threat--no following in another's steps--no need to bow, or cringe, or crawl or utter lying words. I was free. I stood erect and fearlessly, joyously faced all words. And then my heart was filled with gratitude, with thankfulness, and went out in love to all the heroes, the thinkers who gave their lives for the liberty of hand and brain--for the freedom of labor and thought--to those who fell on the fierce fields of war, to those who died in dungeons bound in chains--to those by fire consumed--to all the wise, the good, the brave of every land, whose thoughts and deeds have given freedom to the sons of men. And then I vowed to grasp the torch that they had held, and hold it high, that light might conquer darkness still.

Robert Green Ingersoll

My First occurrence of Disregarding God

My views and opinions on religion were both developed out of my own experiences as a child attending Sunday school and as an adult who has developed somewhat of a "Free thought" attitude. Free thought is the need to justify an opinion with evidence rather than to have faith in an opinion in spite of evidence. (see http://freethought.freeservers.com/)

As a child of approximately seven or eight years old I was attending Sunday school classes (an event I dutifully tried to avoid every week). It occurred to me at some point prior to going to class that the story of creation in the Bible as I understood it conflicted with my understanding of dinosaurs and their presence on Earth 65 million years ago. I asked my mom about this at the time and I suppose as she was unable to answer the question (being a "believer"); she suggested that I ask the Sunday school teacher. As best I can recall I set out to do just that in my next class. The Sunday school teacher being an older woman, very conservative I would say in retopect, struck me as someone who would not be able to answer the question. My concern fore putting her in a awkward situation in which she have no answer in frount of the entire class forced me to abandon my question. She may have very well had an answer but to this day my doubt remains.

Even at this age I was aware that stories I was being told every week were not backed up by any degree of evidence, while evidence was abundant for opposing views. I cannot remember as I look back, a time when I ever really believed in God.

I can't beleive I have never added this Saganism

Life is but a momentary glimpse of the wonder of this astonishing universe, and it is sad to see so many dreaming it away on spiritual fantasy. -Carl Sagan

Intelligent design being taught in US schools

As a Canadian this does not directly affect me as I have not heard of any jurisdictions adding "Intelligent Design" to the curriculum. However, south of the border in the US it is being added by more and more school boards as part of their high school biology or science classes.

In the US, Intelligent Design is not taught in any credible Universities, the only exceptions are a couple of evangelist run institutions. I have read several articles in the last couple of days in which Intelligent Design is referred to as a theory (ie Intelligent Design Theory), as if it should be considered along side the likes of Evolutionary Theory.

Their are 2 definitions of theory that apply here:
1. A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
and
2. An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.

The first definition is the accepted scientific definition of what constitutes a theory, the second is a contrived definition whos usefulness is designed to add credibility to a statement which would not be considered probable.
The first definition applies to Evolutionary Theory. The second definition describes what the religious right has done to adapt to a more and more accepted truth that threatens to discredit their beliefs.

Intelligent Design is pseudo-science. Adding this to the curriculum only serves to put those students at an intellectual disadvantage when compared to students around the world.

Teaching Intelligent Design serves and agenda. The very fact that their are groups who lobby to have this added should be cause for alarm, it should make us ask why. Evolutionary Theory on the other hand has earned its place within the schools. It has been tested, it has adapted and it is accepted. Proof of this is the emergence of Intelligent Design as a last ditch effort to make some connection to a God, but in accepting intelligent design one has to completely disregard Genesis. I wonder if the religious right considered that.

Why I am an Atheist

The following is an excellent article.

Why I am an Atheist

from: "The Value of Free Thought"

What makes a Free Thinker is not his beliefs, but the way in which he holds them. If he holds them because his elders told him they were true when he was young, or if he holds them because if he did not he would be unhappy, his thought is not free; but if he holds them because, after careful thought, he finds a balance of evidence in their favor, then his thought is free, however odd his conclusions may seem.'

- Bertrand Russell

Once again a quote from the best.

To discover that the Universe is some 8 to 15 billion years and not 6 to 12 thousand years old improves our appreciation of its sweep and grandeur; to entertain the notion that we are a particularly complex arrangement of atoms, and not some breath of divinity, at the very least enhances our respect for atoms; to discover, as now seems probable, that our planet is one of billions of other worlds in the Milky Way Galaxy and that our galaxy is one of billions more, majestically expands the arena of what is possible; to find that our ancestors were also the ancestors of apes ties us to the rest of life and makes possible important - if occaisionally rueful - reflections on human nature.
--Carl Sagan (Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark

Men dare not avow, even to their own hearts, the doubts which they entertain on such subjects. They make a merit of implicit faith; and disguise to themselves their real infidelity, by the strongest asseverations and the most positive bigotry.
--David Hume

from: The Age of Reason

Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving, it consists in professing to believe what one does not believe. It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime. --Tom Paine

Bible Verses

I was going to write about ridiculous bible verses in the next couple of days, but this e-mail I received has saved me the trouble. Feel free to verify these, they are all in the bible.

Dear President Bush,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from you and understand why you would propose and support a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage. As you said "in the eyes of God marriage is based between a man a woman." I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18: 22 clearly states it to be an abomination . . End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25: 44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21: 7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a air price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev. 15: 19-24. The oblem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev. 1: 9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35: 2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11: 10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there degrees of abomination?

7. Lev. 21: 20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11: 6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19: 19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and aspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24: 10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20: 14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, as well, you have a direct line to God so I am confident you can help
Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

My Favorite Person to Quote.

A celibate clergy is an especially good idea, because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism.
-Carl Sagan

I maintain there is much more wonder in science than in pseudoscience. And in addition, to whatever measure this term has any meaning, science has the additional virtue, and it is not an inconsiderable one, of being true.
- Carl Sagan

Where we have strong emotions, we're liable to fool ourselves.
-Carl Sagan

A central lesson of science is that to understand complex issues (or even simple ones), we must try to free our minds of dogma and to guarantee the freedom to publish, to contradict, and to experiment. Arguments from authority are unacceptable.
-Carl Sagan

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
-Carl Sagan

Think of how many religions attempt to validate themselves with prophecy. Think of how many people rely on these prophecies, however vague, however unfulfilled, to support or prop up their beliefs. Yet has there ever been a religion with the prophetic accuracy and reliability of science?
-Carl Sagan

"People think that epilepsy is divine simply because they don't have any idea what causes epilepsy. But I believe that someday we will understand what causes epilepsy, and at that moment, we will cease to believe that it's divine. And so it is with everything in the universe." -Hippocrates, (2500 years ago)

A Speech by Ann Druyan

I'm deeply honored to accept this.

I'd like to tell you, briefly, why science it so important to me and why the notion of freedom from religion and freethought is, I think, so centrally important to our society.

My interest in science comes from the moment I discovered one of the pre-Socratic philosophers, a man named Hippocrates who's known to most people as the person who developed the Hippocratic Oath that physicians take. He was an Ionian scientist of 2,500 years ago. He wrote: "People think that epilepsy is divine simply because they don't have any idea what causes epilepsy. But I believe that someday we will understand what causes epilepsy, and at that moment, we will cease to believe that it's divine. And so it is with everything in the universe."

If you are going to pick a moment when science was formally invented you might go back to this insight of Hippocrates, because it's a great aperture to the universe, revealed by science, to the magnificent images that Alan Hale presented to us moments ago, to that image of billions of galaxies, a trillion stars.

Science really delivers the goods. One of the billions and billions of reasons why I revere and cherish Carl Sagan's life is that he felt that it was his personal responsibility as a scientist to share with everyone the revelations, the great liberating power, the powers of demystification that science makes possible.

Not just as scientists but as citizens also, it's our duty to create a society in which everyone has that bologna-detection kit inside their heads, everybody can tell a good argument from a bad argument, can know when their buttons are being pushed, when they're being manipulated, when they're being lied to.

I see a quote up there from the great Margaret Sanger: "No Gods - No Masters." And this notion of no masters is almost in violation of our evolutionary heritage. We are primates, just like the other primates. We share more than 99.6% of our active genes with the chimpanzee. As we've begun to study natural chimpanzee society, not in zoos, but in the wild as Jane Goodall pioneered, we recognize that there is such a thing as chimpanzee politics, chimpanzee social organization. And so it is with us. We have certain tendencies to worship an "Alpha," to look for a leader who will tell us what to do and keep us in line.

The Bill of Rights and the method of science are error-correcting mechanisms that we've devised to compensate for these evolutionary tendencies that we have. The notion of no masters, the notion of a Bill of Rights that protects us from the Alpha pushing everyone else around, the notion of the method of science which says no argument from authority, that each of us should be equal in some sense, have equal access to the information, be able to determine on our own, independently, what is true, these are the great achievements of human society, the most precious thing that we have.

Very often you encounter in our society a kind of resentment and a fear of science. In fact, virtually all of the scientists depicted on television or in popular culture are monsters, really. Either they're socially completely alienated from everyone else, or they've made some pact with the devil, some Faustian bargain in exchange for this arcane information, they've sold their souls, and they're a threat to all of us. This is true in virtually every movie that you see.

We fear science. And for good reason. It has a kind of secret language and a methodology which is very ungiving, which is saying that it's not what makes you feel good, it's what's true that matters.

I think that Carl's voice in this regard was a great, great service to our culture and to our society, because not only did he convey the importance of skepticism, but also the importance of wonder, too, to have both wonder and skepticism at the same time. People think that if you are a scientist you have to give up that joy of discovery, that passion, that sense of the great romance of life. I say that's completely opposite of the truth. The fact is that the real thing is far more dazzling, far more goose-bump-raising, than any myth or childish story that we can make up.

I think, in fact, that the idea that our species has begun to do science earnestly and consistently only in the very recent past is an indication of a kind of adulthood maturity, that we can bear to receive the great demotions that science offers us. We're not at the center of the universe. We're not even at the center of our tiny solar system. We're very young, very new to the universe and to our investigations of nature. But the fact that we are willing to accept these great blows to our narcissism, to our need to be the center of the universe, is a sign that we are growing much more secure. It's something that gives me a lot of hope for the human future.

I remember that one time Carl was giving a talk, and he spelled out, in a kind of withering succession, these great theories of demotion that science has dealt us, all of the ways in which science is telling us we are not who we would like to believe we are. At the end of it, a young man came up to him and he said: "What do you give us in return? Now that you've taken everything from us? What meaning is left, if everything that I've been taught since I was a child turns out to be untrue?" Carl looked at him and said, "Do something meaningful."

I believe that is one of the great lessons of his life. I'd like to tell you how much this award means to me, and how much it means to me that you gather as a community of people who are determined to think independently. I know that in some of the communities that you come from, this can be a somewhat unrewarding and lonely kind of experience, but the fact that you're willing to do this moves me tremendously. I'm very grateful to be honored by you.

Thank you so much.

Imagine no religion,
I wonder if you can?
Nothing to kill or die for,
A brotherhood of man.

-John Lennon

Charlotte Observer | 11/10/2004 | Evolution on trial

The following article that appeared in the November 10th edition of the Charlotte Observer is a precise view of the fudamentalism that is trying to influence the view of Americans. This ideology, based entirely on mythology will prevent the next generation of Americans from forming intelligent opinions about the world around them. This is akin to book-burning, and exactly what we accuse other fundamentalist countries of doing. Perhaps these stickers do belong on a book, that book is the bible.

Evolution on trial

Ignorance of science hazardous to next generation

In Cobb County, Ga., a trial is under way. The nature of the dispute draws a smile: disclaimer stickers about evolution placed on public school textbooks. But the overriding question is serious: how evolution should be taught in public schools.

The fundamental issue is intellectual honesty in public education. That's a fight worth fighting.

The Georgia lawsuit arose after a school board in a suburban Atlanta school district placed stickers inside the front cover of science books used in middle and high schools. Here is what they said:

"This textbook contains material about evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered."

That warning seems harmless, but it must be viewed in a larger context. Across America a debate rages over whether schools should also acknowledge an alternative view of development of life on Earth -- the biblical view. Certainly that view should be respected, but it should not determine what is taught in school as science.

In fact, though not all of Charles Darwin's ideas about evolutionary mechanisms have held up, much in biology makes no sense without evolution. As with all science, knowledge evolves as new discoveries are made, but discoveries haven't discredited the fact of evolution. A community that sends its young people into the world ignorant of that fact does them no favors.

Cobb County is expected to argue that the purpose of the stickers is to teach tolerance, not discount evolution or endorse religion. But the act of adding a disclaimer is a way to discredit a high school biology text used by more than a million students in all 50 states. It's part of a nationwide effort to chip away at evolution. Witness the push in Texas last year to revise textbooks to include evolution's so-called "flaws."

The record in places like Iran and Afghanistan speaks clearly. When religious beliefs dictate what the schools teach as fact, the honest search for knowledge is endangered. That's what the conflict in Georgia is about.

"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever
conceived." - Isaac Asimov

"When Kepler found his long-cherished belief did not agree with the most precise observation, he accepted the uncomfortable fact. He preferred the hard truth to his dearest illusions, that is the heart of science." - Carl Sagan

"Religion prevents our children from having a rational education; religion prevents us from removing the fundamental causes of war; religion prevents us from teaching the ethic of scientific cooperation in place of the old fierce doctrines of sin and punishment. It is possible that mankind is on the threshold of a golden age; but, if so, it will be necessary first to slay the dragon that guards the door, and this dragon is religion." - Bertrand Russell

Was Darwin Wrong? @ National Geographic Magazine

Was Darwin Wrong? @ National Geographic Magazine

This article that appeared in this month’s issue of National Geographic was disturbing to say the least. The article begins with the results of a survey conducted on the American population which found that 45% of respondents believed that humanity was created by God sometime in the last 10,000 years. This is half of the population of the most powerful and richest country on the face of the Earth. This is half of the people who will be voting for a president on November 2nd. This is scary. But even scarier than that is the fact that these numbers have not changed in the last 30 years. Thirty years ago 45% believed the same thing. You would think that with the advancement of science and technology and with people walking on the moon; that Americans would be developing a more enlightened view of their world.

Evolutionary science is one of the most important within the scientific community today. Evolutionary science will cure diseases, correct birth defects and generally advance humanity. Those who hold such closed and ridiculous views of the world in which they live will delay this progress by opposing things like stem cell research.

I am tired of the argument that it is just a theory. A theory is not an abstract idea or a notion that something might be true. A theory is an explanation of something that is supported by the evidence.

Religion has been adapting to the discoveries of science for thousands of years. It has been adapting out of necessity, it must maintain power and wealth and without followers it will it will lose both. If a religion holds true to the belief of something which has been proven false then the followers will stray. The most obvious proof of this is religions view at the time of Copernicus that the Earth was the centre of the universe and everything including the Sun evolved around it. The church (mainly the Vatican) opposed this view and fought it vigorously. Eventually though, they had to concede. They were wrong and the public new this and the church had to adapt to keep its followers. I would argue that if something is wrong time and time again especially something that is supposed to be of divine creation (like the Bible) then it is time to stop adapting it and disregard it altogether. Some would argue that science adapts its views all the time, and changes its opinion based on new evidence. I agree that this is true, but this is the nature of science. Science is supposed to try new ideas and discover new things and change. Religion is supposed to represent a divine view and not have to adapt because after all, it is the truth, right? Wrong. Religion is not real, that is why it has been adapting for many thousands of years. From Rai the Sun God to the Mayan snake/bird to Greek Mythology to Christianity, Islam, Buddha, and Hindi and so on, they have all either adapted or disappeared altogether.

Evolution is real, it is the actual explanation of how life evolved on Earth. It will change it will adapt because it is science.

"Religion is fundamentally opposed to everything I hold in veneration--courage, clear thinking, honesty, fairness, and, above all, love of the truth." - Henry Louis Mencken

"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." -Stephen Roberts

"We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes." -Gene Roddenberry

An Excellent Poem

Come walk away from the ancestral waters.
Their depths lie in darkness; rise up from the bay.
For faith that surrounds us can now only drown us.
We cannot stay; come walk away.

Come walk away from the tales of our childhood,
From Eden's four rivers and God's seventh day.
A continent rises which we must discover.
Dare feel the clay; come walk away.

Come walk away from the old persecutions,
From cross and from rack and from auto-da-fe.
Come up to the sunlight and air of free reason.
The torrents slay; come walk away.

Come walk away from the pond where we started.
The old bog grows heavy and yields to decay.
It sheltered us once, and we've always remembered
Our yesterday -- but walked away.

-Gary McGath

REUNITE LUNA

REUNITE LUNA

A Good Cause.

A reply from Huntley Street

Dear Trevor: Thanks for your e-mail. It found me in Charlottetown, PEI. Remember that 52 Liberals voted that one man one woman constitues a marriage last September. Along with them, approximately two-thirds of the Progressive Conservatives, one third of the Block noted in order to make the amended motion a tie vote. That tie was broken by the Speaker of the House who broke with tradition for Speakers and voted with the Governemnt rathe than voting with the last successful motion in the House on the same issue. Therefore, approximately half of the encumbent MPs are for traditional marriage, and not all Conservative candidates are running I think you are too intelligent a man to simply target this as a "religious righs" issue. This is a human issue. the most solidly pro-traditional family in Dundas is a Unitarian family. Also, the great atheistic states have never messed with the meaning of the word "Marriage." This is a major issue for atheists as well as believers.

Thank you for taking the time to write to me.

Sincerely,

David Mainse
Minister of Evangelism & Social Action
Crossroads Christian Communications
P O Box 5100
1295 North Service Road
Burlington, ON L7R 4M2
Tel **********, Ext. ****
Fax **********

Open Letter to 100 Huntley Street

I am not sure that this letter is being written to the correct address, but I trust you will know where to forward it.

I just saw a commercial on TV with the former host of 100 Huntley Street’s unofficial endorsement of the Conservative Party in the upcoming federal election. While he did not come out and say to vote Conservative this was obviously the message.

This election appears to be a very close one and it is my intention to vote Conservative as I have always done. I support an agenda of lower taxes and fiscal responsibility. I think you should know that there are a great many Conservative supporters including myself who are more than just a little “put off” by the religious right. I see this commercial and it quite frankly makes me think twice and I am sure there are a great many disgruntled Liberals who after seeing this ad will be returning to the Liberal party for fear of electing a bunch of “Bible thumping extremists”.

If your organization supports the Conservatives, you would serve them better to pull the ads off the air before any more damage is done. Do not make the mistake of seeing yourselves or you ideals as main stream. Most Canadians I am sure would not support your message. Leave the political advertising to the experts or at the very least target your ads to like minded people. I am sure there is advertising available during the Benny Hinn show.

T

The Calgary Sun: Whale led astray

The Calgary Sun: Whale led astray

With all due respect to the beliefs of of Native Canadians, it is one thing to carry on with traditions much like I do with Christmas, but when that tradition or belief interferes with the wellbeing of an intelligent creature, one has to draw the line. It does not matter that an old man on his death bed says he is coming back as a whale, this cannot justify not reuniting a lost and lonely social animal with his/her family.

This is just another way in which religion and holding on to beliefs which should have been forgotten long ago interferes with doing what is right.

I would argue to the Mowachaht-Muchalaht tribe that even if their chief did come back as a whale, would that whale not not now require the company of his own. I hope this issue can be resolved in a timely manner as we now have the technology to fix a mistake that nature has made and in doing so save a life.