Re: thoughts on Jesus


"John Wilkins" <j.wilkins1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1ih1991.pgql7n1558fhyN%j.wilkins1@xxxxxxxxxxxx
alwaysaskingquestions <alwaysaskingquestions@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Féachadóir" <Féach@d.óir> wrote in message
news:miio24h9oq135ivnpdj77phrmv75dm810t@xxxxxxxxxx
Scríobh "alwaysaskingquestions" <alwaysaskingquestions@xxxxxxxxx>:

That's what intelligent design does - it says that something looks
designed,
ergo there has to be a designer. I'm not doing that. I'm simply saying
that
I have religious beliefs which are neither supported by or contradicted
by
science.*

Hiding in the gap then.

You reckon that the a belief is invalidated simply because it fits a
particular gap in science?

That's a good question. A belief that fits into a gap might be

1. In the gap because otherwise it would be shown to be false (if
empirical evidence showed it false),

2. In the gap because it deal with potentially *scientific* phenomena
that are, as yet, unaddressable with current theory or method, or

3. In the gap because that gap would *never* be addressable by science

I would quibble about the use of the word *never*, I would say "is not at
present".

Now if I were a holder of such a belief, I would ask why it fit into
that gap. If 1, then I would say that was special pleading on behalf of
my faith system. Putting things into gaps to avoid testing o fthe belief
system is bad faith,literally and metaphorically.

Agreed.

If 2, then it is a *good* belief to have, because it is exposed to
potential disproof and is therefore a risky bet. The riskier the bet,
the better the conceptual payoff if it survives challenges (just like a
scientific theory). Of course, the downside is that one day you may find
that genetics shows that Amerinds are *not* closely related to Ancient
Jews, or whatever special belief you have.

Agreed.


If 3, then one wonders at the necessity for the gap itself. Why, for
example, think there is a "soul" if "soul" is never investigable?

I don't follow your logic there, the belief is addressing the gap, not
creating the gap. People talk about the "soul" as an expression for things
we cannot otherwise explain, if we stop talking about the soul that does not
eliminate those things our wonderment at what causes them.

There
is a historical story for why "soul" arose in the first place, tracing
it back to Plato and the use of his ideas by the Church Fathers,

Plato and the Church Fathers may have come up with particular ways of
expressing the "soul" but the concept of "soul" (or "spirit" if you prefer)
long precedes them and is found in every civilisation we know of.

but
that doesn't tell us why we should *continue* in that belief.

Because the original reasons for the belief haven't changed.

Many of the problematic beliefs in religions are of kind 3. They are
held simply because the belief arose at some point, in good faith, when
science was less developed, or when philosophy was of such and so a
type, and while the science or philosophy has moved on, the beliefs
haven't.

That's why I quibbled with your definition of number 3 - if an adequate
natural explanation is found for a belief then that belief has to be
abandoned or modified to fit with the natural explanation. I don't,
however, see that science or philosophy has moved on to the extent that they
have an adequate natural explanation for what religious people consider as
the "soul".


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What do you know that the rest of the world doesnt?
    ... assumption - that sequence similarities necessitate common decent via ... Puny protests over silly "real time" gap arguments do nothing to ... ID theory only suggests that science can detect deliberate manipulation ... Tell that to SETI scientists. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: thoughts on Jesus
    ... That's what intelligent design does - it says that something looks ... Hiding in the gap then. ... particular gap in science? ... People talk about the "soul" as an expression for things ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: found a picture of evolution in process ...
    ... total entropy still increases even in evolution. ... strongly suggest picking up Asimov's "Asimov's New Guide to Science" ... become filled as our total understanding increases. ... energy-balancing "gap" from the energetics of beta decay. ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: nbc Jeff Jacoby on the looters nbc
    ... >> science is constrained. ... To begin to fill this gap, ... >> interview study to examine how constraints affect what scientists do." ... >> Joe was talking about political correctness impeding science and I ...
    (rec.music.artists.springsteen)
  • Re: thoughts on Jesus
    ... That's what intelligent design does - it says that something looks ... Hiding in the gap then. ... particular gap in science? ... A belief that fits into a gap might be ...
    (talk.origins)