RE: What beliefs would we consider reasonable for a self proclaimed Christian to hold?
March 29, 2018 at 3:04 am
(This post was last modified: March 29, 2018 at 3:24 am by robvalue.)
I'm not sure what you mean by "have faith in our senses". I could be insane or dreaming right now, but scientific techniques work within the structure of whatever this is. That's the point of science, it comes up with models that work. And it's the repeatable evidence of them working that shows that they work. My personal conclusions, or scientific theories, are not supposed to apply to all reality or to be completely accurate. They are meant to be our best attempt to model "reality", whatever it may be. They are always open to new information, and will be reconsidered if they are found not to fit it. Of course, reality could be totally different to how we perceive it. But what we're really modeling is our perception of reality, if you want to get technical. We can't model actual reality because we have no data about it.
So I don't get what you mean that we can only draw conclusions by having faith in our senses. If I am in some deluded state, then my conclusions still make sense and work within the delusion, and that's all they need to do. No one would suggest that any models created for one kind of reality would automatically apply to a different one.
Edit: also, if the approaches were wrong, the results wouldn't work. We wouldn't be building computers and flying planes if our methodology was too flawed to produce workable conclusions. So what is the alternative? The methodology is in fact flawed but we've just been extremely lucky over and over again? I'm not suggesting any methodology we have is perfect. Just that it's good enough for purpose, and that's all we could ever achieve. The conclusions can be tested, unlike any religious ideas.
So I don't get what you mean that we can only draw conclusions by having faith in our senses. If I am in some deluded state, then my conclusions still make sense and work within the delusion, and that's all they need to do. No one would suggest that any models created for one kind of reality would automatically apply to a different one.
Edit: also, if the approaches were wrong, the results wouldn't work. We wouldn't be building computers and flying planes if our methodology was too flawed to produce workable conclusions. So what is the alternative? The methodology is in fact flawed but we've just been extremely lucky over and over again? I'm not suggesting any methodology we have is perfect. Just that it's good enough for purpose, and that's all we could ever achieve. The conclusions can be tested, unlike any religious ideas.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum