Subject:
|
Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 19 Jan 2001 14:40:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1339 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes:
> Exactly. Scientists have faith in THEIR senses. BUT, the odd thing is that
> although we know it's a no-no, we still DO have faith in other people's
> senses. Have you done ALL the research necessary for modern science, because
> you didn't believe it when it was presented to you? No, but you take it on
> faith, with the exception, however, that you are not as adamant about that
> which you take on faith as that which you do not. If you were a
> paleontologist (sp?) you'd be a lot more certain of evolution than you would
> be of, say, nuclear fission. This is also based off of other things that
> have been touched on in the other sub-thread as well, like society defining
> the strengths of your particular faiths via confirmation...
But do you really experience life in this fashion? Either doubting
everything that you haven't perceived personally, or equating the acceptance
of another's testimony with the kind of Faith necessary to believe in a
supreme being? The flaw in your chain of reasoning is that, since there is
no way for me to verify your (or Bruce's, or Steve's) metaphysical
experiment--no way, in short, to reproduce it to the satisfaction of my own
senses--I would have to accept your testimony, if I choose to accept it, on
Faith alone. If Bruce claims that he's come up with revolutionary way of
transmuting ice to water (to pose a hypothetical scientific "breakthrough"
into uncharted teritory), I don't have to accept it on faith alone, since I
can reproduce his hi-tech experiment given the proper tools. This is true
whether the experiment is in quantum mechanics or auto mechanics. The event
itself doesn't preclude my understanding and reproduction of it. If it
cannot be reproduced, then science cannot accept it; there is no faith
involved whatsoever, especially, as Bruce pointed out, since one
individual's perceptions are not the sole proving/disproving factor in such
an experiment. A metaphysical experience such as you've elsewhere described
is an inherently personal and non-reproducible (by others) event, so I can
only accept it if:
a) I have Faith that such a thing is possible
b) I have Faith in your testimony of your own experience
I'm intrigued and a little distressed that you seem to feel a need to force
science into the role of a faith-driven religion, whereas science is in many
ways the cure for faith. Acceptance of sensory data, while not ironclad, is
based on associative experience--sensory datum A coincides with situation A,
and so on.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
| (...) I'm not sure exactly if you're asking this as an either/or question or not... Really the answer is yes to both. If someone tells you the door is locked, what's the first thing you do? Try to open the door. You don't take it on faith. But if (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
| (...) I think they're more-or-less the same. It doesn't matter if you can verify something through the scientific method if you don't actually verify it. You are assuming that it is so - in other words, taking it on faith. Hundreds of thousands of (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
| (...) Exactly. It MAY mean he can't back up his claims. But he might also be able to. Can't say one way or the other... As science would be so keen to point out, lack of evidence does not prove a theory :) (...) Check out the other sub-thread on (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
298 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
