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 frameworkis 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.