[MD] Debate on Science_ReligionToday

[ian glendinning]

Case, two points ...
You said [of Dawkins] I don't care about his snotty attitude and he
makes senses to me, he is aces in my book.

But you would agree that "attitude" counts for something if your
objective is persuasion and a change of mind in the people who
disagree with you ? Or does being "scientifically right" entitle him
to "nuke the bastards" :-) ?

You also said
> But it all seems to me to stem from the difficulty of attempting to
> rationalize ethics. Ethics is about what ought to be and that is a tough
> thing to justify.

But surely that is what the MoQ is about; to "rationalize" ethical
values, without falling into the objectivist trap or blind faith trap.
Probem solved ? That's why I'm here anyway.

Ian