> -----Original Message----- > From: Alex Tabarrok [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > If information doesn't change people's minds - what does? Or, at > least, what causes people to have the beliefs that they have? This is > where Bryan's important work comes in. Understanding these sorts of > questions will give us a much better understanding of social change. > > Alex > There seems to be an assumption, in all academic, scientific, philosophic, religious pursuits, that: The Truth is Good.
Since this so obviously cannot be proven, it seems never discussed explicitly, but when I question, "if the truth is NOT good, which is better?", the obvious answer is "the Good". Tautologically (I think). Now Bible based religions claim they are true, and good. (This almost implies that if they are NOT true, they are not good.) Let us assume the Bible is not true; further, that there is no Biblical God. Thus, no basis for ANY of the 10 commandments, nor thus for any absolute moral good vs. evil. So fornication, adultery, stealing, murder are not "evil", but merely illegal (or not) under certain circumstances; and true social morality is exactly equal to only that which is legislated. There is no meaning to life, no reason to live or to not live constantly drugged out; there is no hell to fear, so the only reason to avoid murder is fear of police. This "obviously" results in a selfish, mean society full of big and little criminals who are constantly calculating how to cheat and steal the most while getting away with it; life is for the current momentary pleasure. Or, as Ken Lay or many others might have said at some time, it's OK if you don't get caught. This (presumed) reality is obviously BAD-reality will NOT be GOOD if the Bible is not true. Therefore, only if the Bible IS true, can the (presumed) reality be good. --- I believe that the above brief rationale captures some of the unarticulated impulses for believing in the Bible. In other words, a Bible believing society is better than an atheist believing society. Irrespective of the "objective" truth of the Bible, the superiority of a "Bible believing society" is a position I strongly believe, and I've heard that F.A. Hayek, privately, believed. (Can anybody corroborate this?). Finally, if, to achieve the better Bible believing society, it is required to proclaim belief ________ this is pretty acceptable. [fill in the disputed fact: the Earth is the center of the universe; God created humans in the last 10 000 years, etc; acceptable until science can more strongly falsify the belief AND the falsification or not is relevant to most people's lives.] I also find it curiously rational. Tom Grey
