[MD] The End of Faith
RKulp at ebwalshinc.com
Fri Jan 25 06:14:24 PST 2008
...its interpretation of data or interpretation of experience that's
key. One person's miracle is another's lite lunch. If evidence is the
only qualifier between faith and reason who's to say whose
interpretation trumps if the data is the same but the explanation
Well, that's just it. That's the kind of debate worth having, one that
might lead to some good. When both sides are working with reason and
evidence, nobody really looses. The end of faith means the beginning of
a philosophical conversation. And when both sides have the data on their
side equally the aesthetic considerations, further explorations and
creativity come into play. This is the desired end in the battle against
faith. This is about the evolutionary freedom of the intellect, see?.
I see where you are coming from.
I don't understand why you can't just show them the evidence for
electrons. Search the web and print out a few things. I've never tried
myself but I'd bet you could do it in less than an hour.
Well this was just a for instance but it is still considered
Electron theory by science. I can't remember where the quote
Came from but it goes like this:
"It is not important that these findings are true what is
Important is that the methods for prediction correspond
With observable phenomena."
The other day I heard Peter Fonda talking about his childhood.
Apparently, Henry Fonda was a christian scientist. When Peter, Jane and
the other kids got sick he not only refused to give them any medicine,
he made them believe that their suffering was caused by their own
spiritual shortcomings. He did this to children, to his own children!
That's cruel and immoral. That's child abuse and it is very far from
reasonable, let alone "air tight". It's probably safe to say that this
theology has killed a few people and some of them were probably kids too
young to fight back. As Christopher Hitchens says, religion poisons
everything. Not least of all, families.
I agree, I was saying that Christian Science has a lot of experience
Defending their beliefs, their argument, from their own perspective
Is solid because they use just enough philosophy to justify
Their stand. I'm just playing devils advocate here, I am on
Your side of the discussion. These folks are dug in.
Convincing them of their own disillusion is a tough nut.
Shed those extra pounds with MSN and The Biggest Loser!
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
More information about the Moq_Discuss