[ % niccccceeeeee! this ties in with things that i like to repeat... and also makes me get back to sam harris' essay, which IS the main point of this thread, isn't it? % ]
actually, i personally DO think that everything that humans "know" or "believe to know" or "think they know" (and so on and so forth) is actually just faith in something.
scientist's taking their job seriously will never talk about their findings in terms of "truth" or "absolute". they are painfully aware that each model is only an approximation of how things might work and valid only until proven faulty. history will show how many such models have come and gone only to be replaced by other "truths". we think ouselves safe because science has "proven" something, while all that science can prove is that their theories are working extremely well to describe what's going on around us. we accept this because there have to be boundaries and rules to which we can cling. i am quite comfortable with this, being sure of the inability of mankind (in our current phase of evolution/progress/whatchamacallit) to grasp the truth or Truth or "truth" or "Truth".
i can accept this because scientists have chosen inductive ways of creating theories and rules - watch and learn, so to say. it gets more difficult with the dogmatic approach of religion.
theists of all creed are dogmatic in their view of the world - "there IS/ARE (a) divine entit(y)/ies." and from this point on they go about deducing everything that goes on in the world around them. which in turn leads to quite confusing, but inherently coherent views of the world and life. coherent, because they are true to the basic dogma of the existence divine. and the atheists does the same, going off with the opposing dogma of the non-existence of the divine. only, the atheist, in order to distinguish him/herself from the theists, incorporates inductive world-views, ideas and theories that seem "rational" to the atheist, to build on top of the atheist dogma.
so, when sam harris goes about gun-toting his atheistic big caliber arguments, i am strangely reminded of sunday preachers under damp tent roofs on tv.
the atheist view is, imho, profoundly correct and acceptable. but only as far as you can agree with any dogmatic worldview. any resemblance to life and the realities thereof or purely coincidental. if there is to be dogma in my world i'd like to creat it myself and not have it dictated by a pope, a congregation, a holy book or sam harris, thank you very much. (what was that about the diamond in my backyard?)
i know, i know, i am repeating myself over and over again. and i know that you know all of what i've written down here, but i just felt i need to have my sentiments on this matter written down. once again. |
