Tom Facchine – Minute with a Muslim #029 – Scientific Method plus Islam equals Truth

Tom Facchine
AI: Summary © The speaker discusses the importance of proving whether a result is true or false based on evidence. They suggest that naturalism and religious beliefs do not explain everything in the world and that evidence cannot be proven without further research. The speaker also suggests that individuals should be serious about their beliefs and that they should develop a process or litmus test to determine whether evidence is true or false.
AI: Transcript ©
00:00:00 --> 00:00:33

You know, oh, well, these religious people they just believe in, you know, well handled, or they set out to Saddam flying on a winged horse and all this other stuff. What nonsense hahaha, some people reject religion and faith out of hand because they jump right to the minut details, right? They say, Well, I can't believe in a winged horse, right? I can't believe in these miracles that the moon was split and things like that. And even people who are, you know, relatively intelligent and have some understanding of science and even might be a little bit critical of scientism itself. But you have to realize that even if you were to apply the scientific method to these sorts of inquiries, you

00:00:33 --> 00:01:04

don't start with your conclusions, right? It's like, the whole point is that you can't believe X does not necessitate that x is false, right? Like, that's the reason why he was subjected to rational inquiry in the first place. So you know, if I'm going to do a science experiment, I wouldn't start based off the assumption that, well, I can't believe that I'm gonna get this result. So I'm just not even going to allow for the possibility. No, we'd have to say, Well, what type of experiment? Can we construct, basically, to prove whether this thing is possible or not? And then you do the experiment, you follow the process, and you follow what the evidence tells you. Right?

00:01:04 --> 00:01:37

You have that discussion of what evidence is, and what isn't valid, or admissible or conclusive evidence, and then you follow the evidence, you don't start with your conclusion, right? That's not research. Right? That's bias. That's prejudice. And so somebody comes to religion and faith. And they say, Well, I can't believe that, you know, you know, there's rocks that speak or that, you know, all this sort of stuff. Yeah, well, okay. You've just stated your conclusion. But have you actually gone through the process? Have you ever even thought about what evidence would look like for the phenomenon of revelation for the phenomenon of profits in the first place? Right, and once

00:01:37 --> 00:02:20

you get into that discussion, now, it's okay, what would it look like? What type of evidence would we believe in or would be convincing or conclusive or even probabilistic right to demonstrate that revelation, or even just take the unseen, in and of itself is a possibility? Right, and one of the strongest sort of things to consider with this is just the fact that, you know, naturalism, as a philosophical position cannot explain everything that we have in this world, right? Everybody who has studied a little bit, they understand that philosophical naturalism says that everything that exists can be explained by a physical mechanism can be everything that exists is limited to the

00:02:20 --> 00:02:51

natural world. Okay, well, what about consciousness? What is consciousness is consciousness, just the firing of neurons in the brain? We don't know, we have no idea. We can't figure out consciousness. And there's other things as well. So these are the things if you want to be serious about it, right? You want to be rational about it, you want to be reasonable about it, you have to go through the process, you don't just jump to the conclusion. And if you have the conversation first, what would evidence look like? And then you actually go through, okay, well, this is what this evidence Yeah, that would perhaps demonstrate that there might be something like the unseen

00:02:51 --> 00:03:26

something beyond the natural world. And then once you go through demonstrating whether the unseen is a possibility, or reality or not, then going to Okay, a creator, is it a possibility or not? And then once you've gone through, okay, creator, yes or no? What type of creator, a perfect creator, an imperfect creator, a creator who can become incarnate in the universe, a creator that's removed, you know, that's physically kind of separate from the universe, right? And then once you go through what type of creator Okay, well, do the qualities of this creator necessitate this some sort of communication? Is there communication from the Creator to to the creation? And what would that look

00:03:26 --> 00:04:01

like? And how could we tell? How could we tell because there's a lot of people who claim that they have communication from the Divine. Okay, well, how can we develop a process or sort of like a litmus test to figure out what actually is or could be communication from the Divine or not, right? So this is what it looks like to be serious, right? And if you and if you come into it, and just say, Well, you know, oh, well, these religious people, they just believe in you know, Muhammad Ali salatu salam flying on a winged horse and all this other stuff. What nonsense, haha. And that's arrogance. That's just arrogance, and it's not being reasonable, and it's not being rational. In

00:04:01 --> 00:04:05

fact, it's the failure to use the rational tools that God gave you

Share Page

Related Episodes