JohnV

Re: SDA
How do you KNOW that?

SanDiegoAtheist

LOL. I'm sorry, but this line of reasoning has cropped up far too many times.

Theists always try to make the epistimological leap from 'belief' which is justified by direct experience and evidence, and 'faith' which is NOT justified by direct experience and evidence.

I have a strong belief, what I would consider knowledge, that there are many scientists out there. I make this conclusion based upon my experience in interacting with many other scientists throughout my lifetime.

I have a strong belief, similar to above, that these scientists determine truth/false claims by attempting to replicate the experiments and reproduce the results of these experiments. This is justified by my own experience within science - that evidence supporting a good theory can, in fact, be reproduced by ANYONE with the inclination to do so. It is also justified by my observation that these results are frequently reported in journals whose continued use by the scientific community DEPENDS upon their being impartial to the 'truth' claims presented to them.

I have much historical backing for these beliefs as well - I know of many cases where one prevailing theory was overturned DUE to conflicting evidence being found, and another theory being put into it's place which explain not only what the theory before it did, but also the conflicting evidence which led to the downfall of the first theory.

I could go on, but I think you get the point - if not, I'm sure everyone else does.

On the OTHER hand, I can look at religion, and the striking thing that *I* see about religion is that it is highly fragmented in opinion, not just BETWEEN religions, but WITHIN them as well. There exists no scholarly consensus - which I WOULD expect if in fact there was a 'truth' to be known. Moreover, I have HISTORICAL reasons for doubting their willingness, and indeed, even their ABILITY to adjust to conflicting evidence.

It took religion 2000 years to accept the evidence of a heliocentric solar system - despite evidence to the contrary which was put forth by the Greeks. In fact, religion attempted to stamp out any attempts to even THEORIZE counter to the stand which religion had taken. It took a similar length of time to accept that the world was spherical - again, despite the fact that the Earth was EASILY demonstrable to be spherical, and that the Greeks had come up with several easily done experiments that proved it to be so. Religion is the LAST to accept new advances.

How much of this is due to equivocating, as you have just done, that 'faith' in something without good evidence is epistimologically the same as 'faith' in something that you have solid evidence and lines of reasoning supporting? A lot I would guess.

Cheers,

The San Diego Atheist

JohnV

Er, you're reading something in that I didn't intend. I merely capped 'KNOW' because you did in the statement which I quoted and to which I was responding.

Now, how do you "KNOW there are many other scientists that DO have the expertise and DID attempt to reproduce the findings...and couldn't."? Did you observe these many scientists in their attempts? Did you read about these attempts?

SanDiegoAtheist

I read about these attempts, and their conclusions, in peer reviewed journals, which provided exact methodology of the tests, as well as their results (or lack of same). The test COULD however, be performed by anyone with the time and materials to do so.

Did I choose to perform those tests? No. Am I in fact basing my verdict that the 'cold fusion' experiment was in error based on some faith in those scientists who did? Yes.

However, you are still equivocating between those two versions of faith, as I mentioned above.

If scientists attempted to perform the experiment, and many of them ended up with wildly different results from each other as well as the original experiment, I'd be required to doubt ANY of their findings. This was not the case - all reported attempts FAILED other than the first initial one - therefore, the weight of the evidence, even second hand, is decidedly on the side that the original experiment was in error, and the subsequent ones were the most likely to be 'true'.

In the case of religious 'faith' - we have the case mentioned above, where all the so-called 'experts' come up with wildly different and contradictory answers, EVEN when they work from the same basic precepts (say Xianity and the Bible) - let alone when you take into account the many varied religions on the face of the earth.

If every theologian came up with the same results, and they all pointed in one direction, and their line of reasoning was able to be followed by anyone who had the time and inclination to (as is the case with scientific experiments), THEN I might class that type of 'belief' as similar to mine in sciences.


Cheers,

The San Diego Atheist

Bible Humper

Oh my Bob, I'm glad I read through this thread before I read The Story Of Bob. I kept imagining the look on Douglas Bender's face and his sputtering indignation.

David M. Payne, that was just awesome. <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

In Bob, Chris, and the Holy Ghoul,

Bible Humper

luvluv

Now all we need is for 6 or 7 of you to die for your belief in Bob, and you've got the equivalent of Christianity.

Who's first?

[ November 07, 2002: Message edited by: luvluv ]</p>

SanDiegoAtheist

I'm sorry, but the Book of Bob clearly shows that there were already Bobites who have died for Bob.

You wouldn't doubt the Word of Bob now, would you?

Cheers,

The San Diego Atheist

Vibr8gKiwi

Right, martyrs are so rare. It's not like there's some in practically every religion and cult in history.

Perhaps you should join heaven’s gate luvluv? At least you can verify that they really died and it's not just some legendary story. By your statement you think heaven's gate should be equivalent to Christianity... or are you going to start special pleading?

[ November 07, 2002: Message edited by: Vibr8gKiwi ]</p>

Kharakov

I think the fact that a scientist can get caught in a lie tells the whole story.

Bible Humper

Woot! The Heaven's Gate movement is equivalent to Xianity, because we know that those people would not die for beliefs they didn't know were true!

Anyways, this is neither here nor there because Bob wants us to preserve ourselves in order to be his Holy instruments on Earth. He sent Chris to tell us to get with the program and start respecting the whole authoritarian thing-a-ma-Bob along with our divine mandate to collect as much as we can of "the usual", money, power and influence.

These things are needed because the Holy Ghoul has inspired us faithful to quicken your journey to Hades, so help you Bob, which we will accomplish with a glorious crasude. Bob promised that we could take any virgin hotties we found among your number, so it is rather a sweet deal, all told.

In Bob, Chris, and the Holy Ghoul,

Bible Humper