On the Unprovability and Unfalsifiability of Religion, why I am an Agnostic:
Pls tell me if i have made any errors. I want inputs.
Spiritual Religious Claims are Unprovable and Unfalsifiable, Making Them Unreliable, and Unlikely to be True:
Alright, unprovable is easy enough to understand, but unfalsifiable? At a first glance, something being unfalsifiable (not disprovable) makes it more likely to be correct, but thatโs not true at all.
To understand what I mean, let me give you an example scenario: A friend of yours tells you that there are invisible creatures that are constantly dancing on everyoneโs heads.
This claim is unreliable, as itโs unprovable, and is unfalsifiable. It canโt be proven, as by definition, thereโs no way to measure the existence of the creatures, as theyโre invisible. Itโs unfalsifiable, as thereโs no way to disprove the existence of said creatures, since theyโre invisible.
Spiritual beliefs, such as non-physical souls, or cosmic forces, cannot be proven (If there WAS evidence for a religion, I wouldnโt be agnostic). Religions also tend to move the goal post on what counts as debunking them, making them unfalsifiable (E.g. The Christian creation myth being interpreted into a metaphor after it was debunked via evolution, errors in the Bible downplayed to just being a product of human mistakes despite the fact that the Holy Spirit helped them write it etc.)
Before we continue, I must acknowledge that there are some statements that are unprovable and unfalsifiable that ARE accepted as truth. For example:
Logical Tautologies: Statements that are true by definition (like "all bachelors are unmarried") cannot be falsified, but theyโre reliable since theyโre logically absolute.
Foundational Axioms: Science itself relies on unprovable assumptions, like the belief that the physical universe behaves consistently.
However, as shown, these statements are reliable in other ways, the logical tautology is logically absolute, and the belief that the physical universe behaves consistently can be shown with empirical tests repeating the same results.
Statement 1: Unprovable, unfalsifiable claims are unreliable.
Statement 2: Religious spiritual beliefs are unprovable and unfalsifiable.
โด Religious spiritual beliefs cannot be considered seriously.
ย
If youโre going to accept the unprovable, unfalsifiable spiritual beliefs of one religion, letโs just say, Christianity for example, you're going to have to explain to me why you donโt believe in the spiritual beliefs of any other religion, that are also unprovable and unfalsifiable.
ย
โฆ
Hey whatโs that?
Oneโs own consciousness: You cannot prove to someone else that youโre conscious. All proof that your conscious is locked inside you and only felt by you.
Hmmโฆ alright.
Have you heard of the idea that one day, people will be able to upload their minds into computers? (Ipromisethisisrelevant). Although with our current technology, itโs just a sci-fi theory, in a hundred yearsโ time, which do you think is more likely? That weโll be able to upload, transfer, whatever our consciousness onto some device, proving consciousness, or weโll find irrefutable evidence for a religion, or be able to solve the problem of evil, or any number of arguments against religion?ย
ย
But what about utilitarian arguments for religion?
Well although I recognize that religion CAN have good aspects, and perhaps, arguably, may have even been necessary in the past to keep law and order, in the 21^(st) century where communities can be found easily, acts of charity can happen from human generosity, meaning can be found through oneself,ย and new laws can be judged and passed via empirical data and logical thinking, religion simply seems unnecessary, causing more divide and conflict than it does good.