On 10 August 2011 23:51, J. Andrew Rogers <[email protected]>wrote:
> Individual opinions on non-religious matters are frequently as dogmatic as > their religious views. There is little about a religious view that is > materially different than the other views most people hold in practice. The > problem is not religious views per se. Most secular opinions are based on an > equal paucity of analysis. > > A great many people hold scientifically reasonable opinions as articles of > faith; evolution is a good example of this. Most people that support the > idea of evolution cannot explain the reasoning behind their opinion, it is > simply what they were taught all right thinking people should believe. There > is no more rationality informing their opinion than the people raised to > believe creationism is correct. I do not see any merit in believing > something that, by coincidence, happens to be a reasonable. > The merit is the appreciation that this belief is a result of somebody's analysis that a lot of others who do similar analysis for a living agree with, but also that it leaves room to the possibility that this might change later as technology and the collective understanding of the sciences involved increase. At least I hope so. Not looking forward to the time when Feynman's lectures are used as the basis of a religious cult. Kiran
