RE: What do moderates think Jesus died for?
January 9, 2019 at 6:11 am
(This post was last modified: January 9, 2019 at 6:16 am by Alan V.)
(January 8, 2019 at 11:32 pm)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote:(January 8, 2019 at 10:54 pm)Thoreauvian Wrote: If you approach the problem of human fallibility rationally, you will understand there are degrees involved. Rationality is better than irrationality. Evidence is better than unverified stories. Science is better than superstition. We are not completely hopeless on our own, unaided by any deity. In fact, we've made real progress.
Right. We are insufficient on our own. That doesn't mean we are always wrong, but we aren't always right either. So why put everything on unreliable beings?
The rest are open to interpretation. Rational ideas can lead to a wrong conclusion, just as irrational choices can lead to the right result. Evidence can be helpful, but it can also be detrimental if interpreted wrong. Science is sometimes superstition, and sometimes what we assume to be superstition ends up being the science of tomorrow.
What progress are you suggesting we've made? I see a volatile world, but maybe we view the world differently.
Learning to live by probabilities, and sometimes being wrong, is just an inescapable part of the human condition.
Why put everything on unreliable beings? Because, as I have already pointed out, we have no real choice. Even in relying on someone or something other than ourselves, we are relying on our own assessments and interpretations of them. It's inescapable.
Life is really hard.
As for the progress we have made, look around you. Science has solved many age-old human problems, and is working hard on most others. We know many things now we didn't know even 100 years ago. That doesn't mean we will ultimately succeed, but for now we are much better off.
