User:Pluke/relief

relief
the argument that the study of God is meaningless because you cannot gain empirical evidence to prove or disprove Him may also be applied to the dawkins book whose intention is for people to embrace atheism, however the reference point to which this can potentially be seen as a better course to religious following lies outside the empirical sense. With one apparently being a waste of time (religious following) and the other a constructive use of time. The judgment can only be made by setting down a concrete meaning of life, which for a true atheist i imagine would be a great contradiction. You are then left with a scenario in which one course of life leads to a potentially self evident result, the reward for a life following religious doctrine, and that where there is no reward. Thus the following of an atheist life is meaningless because there can never be any evidence to justify it, whilst a religious life has a potential reward. Pascal's wager may shadow this somewhat. - to be refined, rewritten and thoroughly rethought

If he exalt himself, I humble him; if he humble himself, I exalt him; and I always contradict him, till he understands that he is an incomprehensible monster