--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "anatol_zinc" <anatol_z...@...> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo" <fintlewoodlewix@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "anatol_zinc" anatol_zinc@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Einstein's theory of General Relativity predicted that light would > bend bypassing a massive planet like the Sun. That was the only feasible > experiment for his untested theory at the time since there were no > lasers, etc. > > > > > > Einstein was asked what if the experiment proves his theory wrong? > He said that would mean the experiment was not done properly. > > > > > > Amen ! > > > > HUGO: > > Wrong about the faith part I'm afraid. That was a measure simply > > of how confident he was about his theory of gravity and light. > > .......... > > >>> > > OK Hugo, so you see a big difference between the word faith and the word > confidence.
Not really, but you were implying Einstein was religious about science when he wasn't at all. I guess the difference between faith in god and confidence in his theory is that his theory was always testable when the existence of a god of any sort appears not to be. One can therefore have confidence in one's theories but one can only have faith in god. > Well I'm no psychic, I don't believe anyone is. And I am confident about that :-) > So let me guess, you might say "I have confidence in myself and > no-faith in God." Well what if, myself = God and confidence = faith? > You can see how absurd the above assertion is. I would say I have occasional confidence in myself and no faith that there is a god. Couldn't see the point really, god is a bit of a failed hypothesis as far as I'm concerned, I've read all the holy books and god seems like a part of cultures that are so distant it's hard to say what god actually was to them. Was he an astronaut or the halucinations from a now defunct part of our brains? Was he an invention by the ruling class to keep the lower orders in line or was he a real live flesh and blood supreme creator being who just happens to not want to have anything to do with us any more? Or was he a name people came up with to explain how they felt in altered states of consciousness bought on by too much mushroom tea or meditation, or both? > It's like the atheist said "I did not believe in God, until I > found out I am God" I would say idiot rather than athiest, all they did was change a definition of something to incorporate a change of opinion about themselves. It isn't like thinking you are god changes the meaning of any other discoveries in any way whatsoever, it is merely a religious concept that makes spiritual people feel better about themselves. No harm in it but it's a conclusion based on faith. If you could *prove* you were god, that would be a different matter but I suspect most people would just say "that isn't what god means."
