Debunking the Myths: Religion vs Atheism and Twisted Truth

27/06/2022

The battle of religion vs atheism is a war that no one will ever win. There will always be believers, and there will always be non-believers. It has been going on since the beginning of time and will continue to rage on until the end. So, which side should you be on? No matter what side you are on, it is impossible not to have your own opinion about this subject. However, this series of articles will not be a debate between the two sides. Instead, it will shed light on some myths presented by both parts of our society as truth.

Both sides claim to be a supporter of truth. Have you ever wondered what truth is in itself? It is generally assumed that truth is the property of being in accord with fact or reality. In everyday language, truth is usually a statement that aims to represent reality or corresponds to it as a fact, proposition, or declarative sentence. In simple language, the quality of being in accordance with reality or facts is known as the truth. Whether a fact, a reality, or something that corresponds to them is considered truth. For instance, a statement would be true if it accurately portrayed reality.

The nature of the truth is discussed and debated in several disciplines, including philosophy, art, and religion. Human activities in which the nature of the truth is recognised rather than questioned are mainly dependent on the conceptual framework. Law and philosophy, for example, are typically influenced by it. In Russell and Wittgenstein’s view, the notion of truth is fundamental and cannot be defined in more accessible terms. In common parlance, the correspondence theory of truth is frequently understood where language or thoughts match an independent reality.

The scientific method is a simple, logical system for gaining knowledge about the world to determine what is truth and what is an outcome of truth; it involves empirically testing theories and accumulating evidence—using objective standards to evaluate new findings and revising conclusions when they do not hold up. Science has divided reality into two parts: ‘ facts’ and ‘theories’.

A scientific fact is something we know to be accurate based on evidence and reason. Scientific facts are typically indisputable, meaning no one will argue against them. For example, Earth is round; Moon revolves around the Earth while Earth revolves around the sun. These are scientific facts because they can be observed, tested, and proved by any scientist with access to appropriate testing equipment. No one would argue that the Earth does not revolve around the sun because there is abundant evidence supporting this idea. A scientific fact is a statement that has been tested and verified to be true. This means evidence and reason behind the statement, ensuring it is not just a theory. Scientific facts are found through objective and systematic observation, measurement, and experimentation; they are also supported by evidence from other sources of knowledge outside the field of study.

On the other hand, In science, a theory is a set of ideas that can be used to make sense of the world. In other words, a scientific theory explains how something works. Experiments can disproven a theory and should always be evaluated with scepticism. When evaluating whether or not a theory is valid, you need to be sure to apply the scientific method. Your opinion about the theory’s validity should only be based on objective evidence and empirical data. Theories can be proven through a rigorous process of testing and revision. This process involves gathering evidence and data, constructing hypotheses, performing experiments, analysing and interpreting results, drawing conclusions, and making predictions. It is essential to include all these steps to verify a theory’s accuracy. Big Bang Theory; Theory of Evolution; General Relativity; Universal Gravity; these and other theories are approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered in scientific society.

In this regard, I would like to point out that scientific theories such as gravity, natural selection, evolution, and global warming are not random guesses or personal opinions. These statements are time-tested explanations based on surrounding facts. Simply put, we think them as accurate as other related things (outcomes) are facts. It is always possible for a new theory to contradict an existing theory. One such example is the Big Bang theory. We do not have any tested evidence to prove the beginning of this universe. Therefore, we rely on the Big Bang theory to understand our existence. While there are five other alternative theories besides the big bang theory, such are:

The steady-state model.
The bouncing cosmological model.
Plasma, or electric universe theory.
The black hole origin theory.
Simulation theory.

In countries like ours, it is often difficult to distinguish between scientific facts and theories because of our lack of understanding of science and weak educational background. Therefore, it is not astonishing to see that The line between truth and lies is becoming ever murkier every day, and no field is an exception. As a result, scholars are often seen exploiting those facts and attacking others’ beliefs by presenting theories as facts while being hostile and abusive. In every society, Scholars have to uphold social morality, but sadly, it seems most of our scholars blur the line between moral and factual judgments when it comes to debates. They forget there is no place in science for twisted realities and fabricated lies.

The battle of religion vs atheism is a war that no one will ever win. There will always be believers, and there will always be non-believers. It does not matter if you are an atheist or a believer. You will always have people who disagree with you. The only thing that you need to do is to stick to what you understand is the truth and accept others who stick to their reality. Nevertheless, there is no need to use lies to prove truth; but sometimes, the lies we tell others are the lies we delude ourselves with.