This week, we are focusing on the Cosmological argument and the Design argument. These arguments represent how one can think about religion from a philosophical perspective. In your blog, I would like you to reflect more generally on what, if anything, you think philosophy might contribute to the understanding of religion. Think about i) whether you think these arguments might change someone's relgious convictions, and ii) whether there is anything about religious experience that is left out of these arguments (for example, some people might say that faith is important for religious conviction, yet of course faith has no role in philosophical argument).

 I believe that the cosmological and design argument might change someone’s religious convictions. Any type of argument with good evidence may influence change on the other party. I think that leaving the main reason for most religions out, like faith is unjust. Faith is something you believe. You might not be able to see, touch, feel, smell or taste it but most religious people have it and use it as a main explanation for their beliefs. I view this topic as I view the atom. The atom was considered something that did not exist. In fact when the scientists tried to explain its existence they were deemed crazy. The scientist knew atoms where real and out there, they just needed to prove it. Will we ever prove the existence of God? Probably not in our lifetime but I do believe in him. I try not to let my beliefs cloud my views on others beliefs.I am always up for a good debate about his existence.  So my question is, why wouldn't faith be a good enough argument to help understand religion? What if the scientist gave up on the atom, think about how our world would of changed.