• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Atheists: do you believe in quarks?

Tamske

Writing...
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
1,764
MBTI Type
ENTP
A while ago, I encountered a demotivational poster about atheism. I didn't find it back, though.
It said something like: "Do you believe in quarks? You didn't see them or prove their existence. So that's faith."

At first, I wanted to make a rebuttal. But, even with eight years of physics education behind me, I couldn't. I have seen atoms and electrons. I've measured radiation. But the strong force is really difficult and, as I didn't choose to specialize in it, I don't know how it works. Well, I know the basics, but not enough to prove, even to myself, that a quark exists.

So I had to ask myself the question: why do I believe in quarks, and not in unicorns? You can call it faith, but to get rid of the religious overlay, I'd choose to call it trust. I believe in quarks because some people have told me about them and I trust those people. Now, of course, why do I trust the quark people and not the unicorn people?

Because the quark people, the scientists, have told me many more things I COULD check and measure. I've spent my whole life being interested in science and measuring things. Because the scientists are the ones who encouraged me to observe and pose hypotheses and experiment and make conclusions. I can't test everything myself, because I don't have the time and money for that. So I do understand the electromagnetic and the weak force in terms of particles like electrons and photons and neutrinos. And when they say "the strong force is just like that, but with quarks and gluons", I tend to believe them. They fit with the other particles. To be really precise: I believe the Standard Model is a good model to predict particle behaviour.

The unicorn people never showed me unicorns, dragons, fairies, ghosts or anything else that would help me believe in unicorns. Worse, they tend to say you have to have faith, that it is a virtue to believe without any evidence.


A last thing. You are free to believe in unicorns. I won't hinder you. BUT.
1) If you want ME to believe too, you know what you have to do. Evidence, please. No emotional blackmailing.
2) If some idiot insults the unicorn, you don't start killing random people who have nothing to do with it. Wear a T-shirt with "Proud Unicornist" on it. Insult the quark. But don't riot and destroy and kill because of an idiot.
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
existence of quarks is quite a lot of more probable hypothesis than god(as defined in bible) is.

#1 rule of science, there are no absolute truths and nothing can be proven without a doubt, there are just probable hypotheses.

naturally everyones world view is based on beliefs(only a fool would deny that), but what you base these beliefs on is the real difference between religion vs science. whether you look at whats most probable thing with current knowledge or whether you believe because someone told you to believe and not question the belief.
 

Tamske

Writing...
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
1,764
MBTI Type
ENTP
Er, that's just my point. Quarks just do fit better in a world of electrons and photons...
 

ilikeitlikethat

You're unbelievable ...
Joined
May 29, 2012
Messages
2,158
MBTI Type
xNTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I'm not an Athiest...

I'm a Satanist :D

Hail Satan.
 

tinker683

Whackus Bonkus
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
2,882
MBTI Type
ISFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I guess in order to provide an answer this question further, I'd have to ask: Is the existence of quarks a scientific law/fact/whatever at this point or is it still in the theoretical stages? I ask because my knowledge of quarks is that of a layperson
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Science is trust too but with less emotional attachment.

Its goal is finding the truth instead of possessing the truth.
 

Stanton Moore

morose bourgeoisie
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
3,900
MBTI Type
INFP
Science seeks to verify reality through repeatable experimentation. I would not call this a pursuit of truth, which is a moral charged term.

'Faith' is what you utilize when your hunches seem true to you, but are unprovable and probably untestable. this condition has nothing to do with the aims of science!
 

Qlip

Post Human Post
Joined
Jul 30, 2010
Messages
8,464
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I don't know any Unicornists, or Dragonists. I suppose the justification of belief in something, especially something like a quark, is in its utility. The belief in a quark is justified by it's utility in predicting physical existence. The justification of belief in universal order, in objective meaning, and of moral authority and other things is its utility in have people act and feel certain ways. That's the truth of it.

EDIT:

I guess I find this oft-repeated subject naive. The effect of belief in something is more important in judging the worth of something than the physical verification of that thing.
 

Randomnity

insert random title here
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
9,485
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I don't believe or disbelieve. I don't really care about them at all.

Things being too small to see or otherwise invisible doesn't mean they're immune to evidence, though. You can see the wind by looking at the movement of things in its path, even if you can't directly see it. Gravity, same thing. I assume quark scientists have more evidence for quarks than "I just belieeeeve" but I don't know anything about quarks, so I don't waste time believing one way or another. I'd learn the evidence for myself if I had to or wanted to, but neither of those have been true for me yet.
 
Top