Scientists are befuddled by a strange new development in almost every field of study. Almost simultaneously, an elaborate degree of complexity is being encountered everywhere. ‘Fundamental stuff’ which was supposed to be getting simpler and simpler with division, is behaving in unexpected, freaky ways.
We are logical, rational beings. At least most among us are. We crave structure. We crave for ideas that satisfy our intuitions. We test
Can we have an objective moral framework in the absence of God’s commandments? Yes, we seem to think so. Must
As for making convincing arguments about God in the paradigm of reason, with A priori logic, let us test how effective
“ It would be more consistent if we called Bible the work of the demon than the work of God.
The role of religion as a moral reference point has proved controversial time and again. With so many religions, having contra
Religion has died the death of any possible benevolence and good will, mainly due to oversimplification. Oversimplification from reductionism. By benevolence, I am not
In their studies on the brain, cognitive scientists have traced the progress of human cognition across millennia. As the cognitive scientist Merlin Donald broadly categorises it, cognition evolved from the initial Mimetic domain, moved to the Mythic, ending at the contemporary Theoretical domain.
The torch bearers of modern atheism like to make the self-congratulatory use of the ‘absurdities’ and ‘depravities’ of scriptures to punch religion right in its face. You have to hear Richard Dawkins cheekily say, “It’s ridiculous to believe that Muhammed would fly to heaven on a winged horse”, as if he had made a killer move and declared ‘checkmate’.
Atheists love to snuggle in the warm protective folds of the scientific institution for almost every argument. Science is the only good way, they repeat ad nauseam. The only good way for everything; values and ethics included. Really?