Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site fortune.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!mhuxn!houxm!ihnp4!fortune!polard
From: polard@fortune.UUCP (Henry Polard)
Newsgroups: net.flame,net.religion
Subject: Re: History as Fact / Science and Religion
Message-ID: <4750@fortune.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 7-Dec-84 15:55:19 EST
Article-I.D.: fortune.4750
Posted: Fri Dec  7 15:55:19 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 8-Dec-84 06:11:50 EST
References: <29@rti-sel.UUCP> <674@amdahl.UUCP> <675@amdahl.UUCP>
Reply-To: polard@fortune.UUCP (Henry polard)
Distribution: net
Organization: Fortune Systems, Redwood City, CA
Lines: 65
Xref: watmath net.flame:7128 net.religion:4971
Summary: 

In article <675@amdahl.UUCP> gam@amdahl.UUCP (Gordon A. Moffett) writes:
>....  Religion is based on belief, and is a private experience 
>between one's self and one's Creator.  
>Science doesn't DEAL with "Creators" or "Miracles"
>or other religious matters.  They are two different world views --
>Not incompatable, just different.  Religious persons should not have
>to "justify" their beliefs to the satisfaction of a scientist or
>anyone else.  Scientists should not expect their facts to obliterate
>religious belief.

Science is public. You either show the goods and reasoning or you 
shut up.  Religion is private. Some people - especially Christian 
proseletizers on the net - think:"MY experience counts more than 
anyone else's.  Believe what I believe or burn."  Well, as long 
as one is talking to someone else, especially when trying to convince 
the listener of the existence of a deity, it's not private experience
anymore.  

There are two major ways to convince people something
exists:

1. Intimidation -  if you don't agree, something bad 
	will happen to you.   If you don't believe in Ubizmo
	and make hIM your personal savior, you will burn
	forever.  The person who uses this method cannnot be wrong.  
	It involves a claim of superiority (because he knows more than
	you do - i.e, that Ubizmo exists and wants such-and such)
	on the part of the proponent.  The issue of whether Ubizmo exists 
	is muddied by the issue of the authority of the proponent.  For 
	the proponent there is always an "out" if the listener
	doesn't agree with the proponent: the proponent isn't wrong,
	nor has the proponent presented the case unskillfully - the 
	listener is just prideful and stubborn.

2. The scientific method.  In its simplest form it is: "there it is".  
	Reasoning enters into the picture to make sure that 
	what is being claimed contains no contradictions,
	and unique events need independent corroboration to
	establish them as facts.
	From the point of view of talking about religion, 
	science enters into the picture when religion makes claims about the
	about the physical world or history.
	In terms of proving or disproving the existence of God 
	or Christ or Ubizmo scientifically, the strongest thing that a 
	believer in one or all of these can do is show e.g, Ubizmo.  There is 
	nothing like the actual presence of an object to establish its
	existence.  
	There is no "out" for the proponent in a scientific 
	argument - the item in question can be shown (even if only indirectly)
	or it can't, or one settles for "we don't know because of lack of 
	evidence"(Uncertainty implies humility).  The burden of proof is 
	on the proponent, and the proponent can be wrong.  

Here is where the difference in world view shows itself - whereas in a 
scientific framework the proponent of a point of view must constantly 
face the possibility of being wrong,  in a religious framework  is always on the side of the proponent, who is always right.
That is one reason why scientists and religionists have a hard time talking
with each other.

-- 
Henry Polard (You bring the flames - I'll bring the marshmallows.)
{ihnp4,cbosgd,amd}!fortune!polard
N.B: The words in this posting do not necessarily express the opinions
of me, my employer, or any AI project.