kauer at biplane.com.au
Fri Mar 2 14:14:59 EST 2007
On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 13:32 +1100, Brendan Scott wrote:
> > Dawkins' argument is that faith is bad; that encouraging, praising and
> > rewarding faith is anti-intellectual, anti-science, anti-knowledge and
> > anti-human.
> I have not read the book. However, if this is his thesis it is
> plainly false. Everyone believes something - indeed I believe most of
> everyone's daily lives is dictated by one belief or another.
Huh? Belief is not the same thing as faith. Belief in a wrong thing can
easily arise, and as easily be disposed of by the judicious application
of facts. In the absence of facts, one can accepting that one simply
does not know. Even then, an intelligent person can generally make some
kind of rational assessment of the probability that a given belief is
true, or if it is not true or false, whether it might be appropriate or
Faith is set up in the absence of facts, even in spite of the facts. It
continues in the face of facts, and is typified by belief in things that
are one or all of demonstrably false, wildly improbable or unnecessarily
> There's plenty of philosophy of science type stuff to show that any
> science which has an interplay with the real world is always
Absolutely. But never contingent on denying that which is either
patently true or (in the absence of fact) most probably true.
Perhaps you should read the book.
Karl Auer (kauer at biplane.com.au) +61-2-64957160 (h)
http://www.biplane.com.au/~kauer/ +61-428-957160 (mob)
More information about the Link