andymackem wrote:@ Boudicca. You have the right to say their theories are rubbish. But if they total roughly half the population, and we are in a democracy, don't we have to accept a majority verdict (once we've removed the don't knows and don't cares)?.
Yes, but one can accept something grudgingly, can one not?
To accept is not necessarily to like or agree, or to even give up on the ridicule.
andymackem wrote:The evidence for a transcendant god, if you choose to believe it, is also everywhere. I have friends who insist that God (the Christian one) has directly intervened in their lives and the lives of people around them. Personally I disagree with them, but they feel they have more direct, personal proof of their God than I can derive from any scientific treatise. And without having shared their experience, how can I be sure they are wrong?
You cannot be sure your friends are wrong. I cannot... I
am not. I do not dismiss any of these things
entirely without proof - I can't prove the nonexistence of God, goblins, or
for that matter. But, to me, someone else (no matter how close they are to me) saying that they have had some sort of experience of one of these things does not constitute 'evidence' of any great strength. It's fundementally anecdotal.
Science provides far stronger evidence because it is based on endless questioning, exploration of all possible reasons for an apparent 'phenomena'. No quantum leaps or hasty conclusions - and no attempt to conceal its frequent inability to come to a conclusion (being a product of our imperfect minds, after all).
andymackem wrote: Faith = always destructive. Listen to Bach. Think again. What I term "corporate religion" might be, but faith can inspire wonders as well as disasters. From the earliest ages of human history it has prompted the high watermarks of civilisations: think pyramids, Stonehenge, the great churches, temples, mosques, think the art of the Italian renaissance. To pick a few examples. And yes, on the debit side think Spanish inquisition, Crusades, beheaded hostages in Iraq and all the rest. It's a two-way street.
I was brought up on Bach! (where did it all go wrong
)
I was a little unclear about what I meant by faith. The examples you give are, to me, results of great strength of human character and ability. I would even say spirit and inspiration, although I mean that in an entirely flesh-and-blood, this-world way. It is amazing what human psychology is capable of - the strength of a single person or a group of people on a m*****n (sorry!
) to achieve something. And yes, many of these missions (sorry again!) were in the name of God, but there are plenty of situations where human beings have directed this same instinct to achieve great things into non-religious actions and creations.
When I say "faith", I mean sheer close-mindedness, inability to accept any reality other than the one you have faith in, no matter how much evidence is brought to your attention that contradicts your belief. The thing about all the great human achievements you've described is they were all quite possible, with extreme effort. There was a lot of evidence that they were difficult, but not impossible. I suppose a main function of science is to push the boundaries of what exactly is possible for us humans, and to explore the grey area of uncertainty.
But if I told you I had faith that one day, if I just "focused my energies" enough, I'd turn into Joanna Lumley (in order to fulfil all Von's wildest fantasies of course), you'd see that I was a poor deluded soul, because my "faith" would be in something completely impossible. Every piece of evidence flies in the face of my belief that I can transform into another human being who is about 40 years older than I am, but I'm not going to let that shake my faith.
The world is full of people who believe utterly bizarre things in the face of all sorts of evidence because psychologically, it's the most comfortable way they know to exist. Psychiatric wards are full of them, and I've a feeling evangelical churches are even fuller.
Sorry for the length of this post - if you want to reply, Mr. Andy Sir (you, mackem, not the other one!
), take it to the holy thread, boy!
But since Daddy Bush has bailed W out of every shitheap he's ever landed himself in, he's not been subject to selective pressures
