--- "Marvin Long, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jan 2003, Dan Minette wrote: > > > For example, if one wishes to argue that only > things for which there is > > solid empirical evidence need to be considered > real, one finds much in the > > trash heap; including many things believed in by > empiricists. The classic > > one is self-awareness. If the mind can be reduced > to the brain, and the > > brain works by biochemistry, then there is no > reason to assume that humans > > are self aware. It adds nothing that cannot > already be explained by > > biochemistry. Yet, few atheists deny the > existence of self consciousness, > > and argue long and hard that what isn't self > consciousness really is. > > And then, On Thu, 9 Jan 2003, Deborah Harrell wrote: > > > The philosophical discussion has been outlined > again > > by Dan, and I can't improve on it. But I agree > with > > you that articles of pure faith can't be proven or > > unproven.
<sheepish grin> Lordy, that came off as arrogant! > When those articles have no measurable consequences, > yes. <puzzled look> Um, I was referring to particular core beliefs (like "Jesus is the Son of God"), which can be neither proven nor measured. Derivative beliefs (and I'm using my own terminology here) like "I must convert others to belief in Jesus" certainly have had consequences, both bad/coercive/fatal and good/life-saving. > But it seems to me that if the atheist argues > according to the outline > given by Dan, he must lose. Not because atheism is > false, necessarily, > but because when Dan outlines the debate he invites > the atheist to permit > his beliefs to live or die according to the success > of a purely empirical, > naturalistic metaphysics. Because atheists tend to > be gung-ho on science, > they often accept these terms and end up arguing > forever about the > implications of quantum mechanics and consciousness > and whether or not > science can explain everything worth knowing. > > Which is awfully hard. Fortunately, the phenomena > that make naturalistic > metaphysics difficult, perhaps even impossible, > cannot themselves prove > the truth of any particular theology [*], so in the > end there's really no > reason for the atheist to assume that his belief (or > lack thereof) must > live or die according to a certain metaphysics. OK. My personal agenda doesn't include "proving" anything about my belief in the Divine, or ridiculing anyone about their 'universe outlook' (well, privately I might wonder what happened in someone's past that made them need to think that a mediocre science fiction writer with paranoid delusions of grandeur had latched onto 'the Truth'). IIRC, in several belief systems, Faith is a divine Gift - which implies that the non-believer is unworthy of it for some reason; that seems to me just one more way of attempting to bolster poor self-esteem. The darker consequence of that idea leads to burning 'infidels' because, if they were worthy folk, obviously God would have graced them with the Gift of Faith... > And of course there is ample fodder for skepticism > in the history and > character of religious belief itself. Lately I've > been wondering if we're > not in a second Axial Age, paralleling the the time > when the world turned > from simple tribal nature deities based on eternal > seasonal cycles to > psycologically complex, mercantile/imperial deities > designed to give > meaning to broad civilizations existing in a more > linear mythological > time. The new gods are ideologies; God is a fetish; > and wisdom as ever > means reaching beyond the tenets of conventional > belief. > > [*] Although a multiverse-interpretation of QM seems > to "fit" well with > Buddhism's notion of infinite beings inhabiting > infinite planes of > existence. And how does the self-consciousness > argument work with > Buddhism, anyway, where there is no "self" and the > perception of thoughts > and emotions is as a mechanical a process as > perceiving the hand in front of one's face? [I'm going to assume that that's for Dan...] Debbi doffing her fake antlers now ;) __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
