> > > > "Agnostic" means "not knowing", right? I don't really > > > >see that there is much to DISAGREE with there. You might personally > > > >KNOW, but should be open to the possibility that others don't. > > > > > > I'm not sure what you are getting at in the last paragraph. Let's change > > > the topic under discussion from religion to astronomy (or math, or physics, > > > or some other subject at which you may be considered an expert). When I go > > > into the classroom, it is assumed that I know something about the topic, > > > and that it is not just a possibility but a certainty that the students in > > > the class do not know as much about it as I do. > > > > No, our situation is more like a seminar. We all know a lot > >about some subjects, and less about others. You need to be > >respectful, and not assume you know more than others. > > Does this mean that the statement "You might personally KNOW..." was > intended specifically for John? : )
No, it was directed at all religious people who feel that they can talk others into their faith. As I understand St. Paul, faith is not something one picks up by being argued with. > >We have > >different data and viewpoints, and are trying to work out what > >is true. In that sense, I'm asking for a spirit of scientific > >inquiry. > > Some also think it's useful during a scientific or academic inquiry to > consult those who have spent significant time studying the subject and who > have taught the subject. > > --Ronn! :) If they have anything useful to say. It's certainly possible to have studied something but not be able to articulate what one has learned. What I was saying is that if you can't articulate your knowledge, yelling at people won't help. ---David _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l