Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: RICH ROSEN'S misconceptions
Message-ID: <291@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 28-Nov-84 11:35:20 EST
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.291
Posted: Wed Nov 28 11:35:20 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 29-Nov-84 05:22:24 EST
References: <2200@stolaf.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Communications Research, Piscataway N.J.
Lines: 33

Could someone please send me all the articles in the chain leading to
this article.  Apparently the chain starts with an article by Ken
Nichols on what he feels are my misconceptions.  I'd like the opportunity
to answer that, if I might.  In the meantime, let me comment on the
followup followup article anonymously posted (or so he thought) by
William Gulley (either that or something is screwy with posting at stolaf).

]Nothing can convince *me* except hard evidence.  Do you have any way to
]*show me beyond a shadow of a doubt* that the "Spirit of God" even exists?

> *I* couldn't, because, as was stated before by K. Nichols, what conclusions
> you would get out of any evidence that Christianity could come up with would
> completely depend on the mentality that you take into interpreting it. For
> that matter, do you have any way to show me (a non-Physics major) beyond a
> shadow of a doubt that atoms exist?  [GULLEY]

Gulley comments on how normal interaction between people ("How are you?" "I'm
fine."  "Prove it.") doesn't demand the rigors of scientific investigative
processes.  That's simply because that's what human beings want in daily
typical interactions.  If we didn't make assumptions about many things in
daily life, we'd all die of brain overload (as opposed to stagnation from
brain underload that I've seen... oh, never mind!).  But a real examination of
what is really going on in the universe requires more stringent standards.
Telling me your friend is "fine" because he says so is one thing; telling me
that the universe is the way you choose to believe it to be because you
think so or someone told you so is quite another.  People who want to ignore
thorough investigative process because it's too complicated or confusing (like
Nichols does) or because they don't have the required knowledge base ("I'm not
a physics major.") do not change the results of serious inquiry.  They simply
choose to ignore them because they don't fit into their belief structure.
-- 
Occam's Razor:  I liked it so much, I bought the company!
						Rich Rosen    pyuxd!rlr