You shouldn't be seeing my way of thinking as close-minded... I am 100% open to the idea of an afterlife, so long as there is evidence to support it.
Science is about admitting what you do NOT know, but not what you CAN'T know. We have the potential to understand the universe and the human mind, but we DON'T know anything at all about it yet.
To say I should be open to the idea simply because I don't know where it originated is absurd. I'm not open to the idea because I have to be convinced to be open to it. Nothing worth believing requires you to be convinced it's true.
There's just nothing else like the belief of an afterlife. Gravity, thermodynamics, climate... even STARS follows a series of logical conclusions tested by science. You can not test the theory of an afterlife without inventing reanimation. There's also no reason to test the theory, as it's B A S E L E S S
IIN when you die all will be revealed
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
You shouldn't be seeing my way of thinking as close-minded... I am 100% open to the idea of an afterlife, so long as there is evidence to support it.
Science is about admitting what you do NOT know, but not what you CAN'T know. We have the potential to understand the universe and the human mind, but we DON'T know anything at all about it yet.
To say I should be open to the idea simply because I don't know where it originated is absurd. I'm not open to the idea because I have to be convinced to be open to it. Nothing worth believing requires you to be convinced it's true.
There's just nothing else like the belief of an afterlife. Gravity, thermodynamics, climate... even STARS follows a series of logical conclusions tested by science. You can not test the theory of an afterlife without inventing reanimation. There's also no reason to test the theory, as it's B A S E L E S S
--
sandnigga
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
well at least you admit its a theory