Atheist can you prove, through scientific method that you are right about the afterlife/no afterlife?

Question

The science of ecology and evolution shows us that diversity is stronger than monotony. I see the hostility towards and general intolerance of others doctrines and cultures as a major problem for human survival. If science is to be used as an excuse to be fanatic about your doctrine, I feel it should at least be respected.
Please expound on your theory.

No, I respect science, but believe in nothing, it is because I respect atheism as a theory that I asked. Like all religions/doctrines, I may respect the theory but do not have to respect individual, ignorance, intolerance, piety, attachment without thought any more than most of you claim to.
When you remain narrow minded and sensitive to opinion, you do not help your case.
Being an Atheist does not give you licence to be a hypocrite. When you remain narrow minded and sensitive to opinion, you do not help your case.
Being an Atheist does not give you a license to be a hypocrite any more than any other belief. You ask others to do what you will not;be rational in your dedication.

Answer 1

There are several ways you can "prove" reincarnation.

1) The readings of Edgar Cayce (there are over 14,000 of them) Read the book "Many Mansions" on his readings (http://www.amazon.com/Many-Mansions-Story-Reincarnation-Signet/dp/0451168178). These reveal that some of our present illnesses are a result of wrong doings of our past lives. So it not only proves rebirth, but also 'karma' as well.
(http://www.edgarcayce.org/about_edgarcayce/reincarnation/reincarnation.asp)

2) Research by Dr. Ian Stevenson based on hypnotism. When a person is hypnotized he can be made to 'recall' his own past lives. This is commonly used to find the root cause and treat accordingly. (http://www.near-death.com/experiences/reincarnation01.html)

3) Some children talk about their past lives during their early ages (say 3 - 6 years). They use strange words which are only used in those regions.

4) When you meditate and concentrate your mind, in the 4th Dyana, you achieve a state of pure concentration of mind. There you can turn your attention to look back at your own past lives.

Answer 2

The scientific method requires the acceptance of three axioms, each of which can be shown to be necessary for knowledge to be attainable. 1.) Mathematics & Logic are valid. Truth is, literally by definition, a logic value. Therefore, without the validity of math and logic, knowledge is unattainable. 2.) Observation is valid - either unaided or aided by mathematically supported methods. For example, before the theory of optics was discovered, a lens would have not be valid; a crystal ball is not valid but if a theory of scrying could be mathematically discovered and verified, it would be. Without observation, you have no data on which to operate, and knowledge is unattainable. 3.) The supernatural does not exist OR is non-effectual in natural matters. If the supernatural exists and has influence, then there is no way to acquire data in such a way that it can be held as consistent or objective -- the supernatural could arbitrarily choose to change the gravitational constant of the universe, for example. Without permanence, knowledge is unattainable. Since those three axioms MUST hold true for knowledge to be attainable, and those are the three principles upon which science is based via empiricism (most properly, the three axioms are the axioms-of-choice for an empirical epistemology), if a thing cannot be expressed in scientific terms, it cannot be held as factual knowledge.

Answer 3

I do not believe there is an afterlife because no evidence exists for it. Thousands and thousands of years of people believing in it, having faith in it, living their lives by it, even killing each other to obtain it, and still no evidence for it exists. None. Zero. You'd think that by now, such proof would have come up somewhere, in some form. Does that mean no proof will ever exist? Not necessarily, but the odds are against it.

What's more, for every religion, there is a different afterlife, so which one is it that I am supposed to prove or disprove--Christian, Hindu, Muslim, ancient Egyptian, Wiccan, pagan, Jewish, what? Any of the above? None of the above?

Answer 4

I think your question hits an important point. Atheists constantly argue that since there is no evidence of the existence of the afterlife, they refuse to acknowledge it. They demand the use of science to prove the existence of everything else, but refuse to acknowledge God and heaven when they already admit that science cannot be used to prove the existence or non-existence of it in the first place!

Answer 5

Atheists do not propose any proof. They simply point to an absence of any proof or even any evidence of the existence of god. It's not about hostility or doctrine, just about not being swept along with everyone else saying "oh yes look at the fine new clothes the emperor is wearing", when they don't see any clothes.

Answer 6

Atheists know better than to bother with the question because it is not a testable hypothesis.

Science stays clear of the spiritual-religious, why don't you stay in your own neighborhood, as well?

--------------------------------------

Edit -

What hypocrisy? Exactly how are Atheists hypocritical?

It would by hypocritical for an Atheists to act the atheist 6 days a week, but go to church every Sunday.

Answer 7

How do you prove a negative? There is no evidence to support the prospect of an afterlife. When the body dies, all activity ceases and does not leave a forwarding address.

Answer 8

Your reasoning makes no sense. You can't prove or disprove things like the afterlife which cannot be empirically tested by the scientific method. But again, that doesn't prove anything about these thing's reality or unreality.

Answer 9

My "proof" that no afterlife exists would be...

Remember before you were born? That's what afterlife is like. Nothing.

Answer 10

"If science is to be used as an excuse to be fanatic about your doctrine, I feel it should at least be respected."

I'm glad you respect atheism.