It's only somewhat surprising to see the same people making the same Category Errors over and over again.
SO, J PWhipped, did those lab results ever come back telling you whether or not your significant other really loves you?
I mean, since only science has the answer to every question and all.
Truth is that:
"Ultimately, the problem with militant neo-atheism is that it represents a profound category error. Explaining religion - or, indeed, the human experience - in scientific terms is futile.
"It would be as bizarre as to launch a scientific investigation into the truth of Anna Karenina or love," de Botton (an atheist) says.
"It's a symptom of the misplaced confidence of science . . . It's a kind of category error. It's a fatally wrong question and the more you ask it, the more you come up with bizarre and odd answers."
see link #33
I love science, it's great for a lot of things, but not everything. Most scientists know it's limits and don't think that it answers all questions. As a matter of fact, much of science is "accepted theory" as scientists understand that in many cases they have some evidence, and some proofs, but they don't have all the facts to move beyond calling something a theory or an accepted theory.
Then we have those who say that if we don't agree with their Category Error, then we belong to, "a cult".
There is plenty of evidence of order in what could have well been a universe of chaos... last year's Nobel Price Winner figured that the odds of that order occurring naturally to be as close to zero as one can get. Yet any theory of why that order exists, such as multiverses, string theory, or living in a computer simulation are better to some than the theory that order was created.
As much damage as fundamentalism has done to the credibility of religion or politics, say communism, socialism, or atheism, it does not negate the theories themselves.
I've been as hard or harder on fundamentalist "christians" than anyone here. Yet I get called a cultist for having beliefs that are different from some agnostics and or atheists. Should I start calling them, "Neo-Atheist cultists"?
That would be just as stupid as what they do.