No I am suggesting that anecdotal evidence is not evidence to you at all because it doesn’t fit with scientific methodology, but then nor does free will fit with this either.
Theism Makes Science Impossible
by cofty 71 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
cofty
Of course it does.
-
Seraphim23
So why are you surprised at my predictability then?
-
cofty
I have not the slightest idea what your point is Seraphim. Has it anything to do with the OP?
-
Seraphim23
Indeed it does but never mind.
-
cofty
OK
-
Seraphim23
Thank God for that.
-
Terry
An honest thinker begins invariably with errors of ignorance and errors of supposition.
As the honest thinker investigates phenomena he/she has expectations.
When the facts contradict expectations there is a crisis. An intellectually honest person is willing to be wrong in order to be right.
The intellectually dishonest person is unwilling to give up presuppositions. He/she proceeds to bend the facts to preserve the
false premise in every way possible.
When push comes to shove, however, either facts will win out and defeat false premises OR a cognitive dissonance will occur.
Cognitive dissonance allows compartmental thinking, and that is damaging to the sane person's well being.
On some level the dishonesty of holding contrary ideas simultaneously destroys the rational mind and paves the way into a
retreat into corruptive psychology, depression and neurosis.
What is wrong with intelligent people who simply cannot admit their model of reality is wrong?
They become entrenched in dogma defense to the point of wilful and insidious refusal to regard their accusers as worthy human beings
deserving a hearing. Why? Otherwise, they condemn their own views from the outset!
Holding supernatural "truth" on the same level of esteem as the natural functions of reality is a neurotic dissonance which diminish
one's sanity, fairness of mind, and capacity for reasoned discourse.
-
Seraphim23
Even though agnosticism is probably and arguably the most rational of all positions!
-
adamah
Seraphim said- Even though agnosticism is probably and arguably the most rational of all positions!
Maybe. I'd broadly describe myself as an agnostic, except for Abrahamic God of the Bible: I've seen enough evidence from multiple lines of investigation to be convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that He doesn't exist, but is merely the work of clever men.
TERRY, I don't know if you saw the debate last night between Ham and Nye, but I was impressed by how they kept it cordial and didn't get into the agro "mine's bigger than yours" thing typically seen in on-line forums (so annoying, since the real goal of a debate should be to uncover truths thru challenging thoughts, and not be a free-for-all bar brawl).