I would like to think there is a qualitative difference between scientific 
belief and religious belief: scientific belief is adjusted in the light of 
contradictory evidence, while religious belief is not. At the very least, 
there is a quantitative difference: religious belief is adhered to more 
obstinately in the light of contradictory evidence than is scientific 
belief. In addition, there is a difference in attitude: even the most 
obstinate scientist will claim that his position is consistent with the 
available evidence, while the religious believer holds that he has 
ultimately tapped into to a truth that transcends mere human reason.
Stathis Papaioannou
Tom Caylor writes:
>Bruno wrote:
>>I think everyone has religious faith...
>
>Amen, Bruno, and Ben also!  This is of course a searing statement, which 
>goes back to why the word "theology" is taboo.  As it's commonly said, the 
>two topics to stay away from in conversation are religion and politics.
>
>But, without using the word religion, we can safely say that we all have 
>some basic belief that we hold to in order to make the decisions of our 
>practical living, whether they are every-day decisions like holding a 
>grudge against someone (or not), or bigger decisions about our course in 
>life such as getting married (or not) etc.  The modern (and leading up to 
>the modern) reductionist philosophy has split these particulars apart from 
>our musings about universals, so that people typically no longer see any 
>connection between them.  (Talk about going in the opposite direction from 
>"Everything"!) In a way it is rather convenient because we can live out 
>"personal" lives the way we want to.  But the reality is that in being set 
>totally free from universals, we become enslaved.  The ultimate destination 
>of rationalism in a totally closed system is something like pan-critical 
>rationalism, where we end up in a swirl of confusion.  Even then, we really 
>are having faith that somehow the "system" is set up such that things will 
>work out OK.  If we didn't, then what are we left with?  In order to have 
>freedom we need at least some constraints.  For example, take the axiomatic 
>system.  This applies also to the "Mathematics: Is it really..." thread.  
>So there needs to be a faith that something is fixed, even if we don't yet 
>know, or perhaps believe that we can never truly know, what is it.  This 
>something is what is called truth.
_________________________________________________________________
Make your dream car a reality 
http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fcarpoint%2Eninemsn%2Ecom%2Eau&_t=12345&_r=emailtagline&_m=EXT
Received on Thu Feb 02 2006 - 18:57:14 PST