(October 29, 2008 at 5:35 pm)CoxRox Wrote: I ask this as I just noticed a quote of Richard Dawkins. I would love to be able to proove things for myself e.g E=mc2. (I am rubbish at even basic maths and know that I can't fathom equations like this but I have faith that others understand and know the workings of them.) I don't think faith need always be negative as Dawkins asserts. Yes, it can mean you have blindly accepted something without trying to understand it, (which would make you a fool) but it can also be because you are not capable of understanding the whole picture but you understand and 'see' how other related stuff works."Faith" taken with its usual meaning is definitely a cop out.
"Believing" that there is a god behind the scenes cannot be proved/disproved at all.
My maths skills aren't fantastic but I "believe" that e=mc2 because it can be explained to me by someone who does understand the necessary maths (if they take small enough steps!
).Same goes for the evidence for evolution. From what I've read I feel I have enough of an understanding to think it is "right" but for DNA/molecular level details I know I could talk to someone who would show me the details.
"Belief" in Intelligent Design cannot be explained by anyone, it is purely a way to shoehorn a "god" into things.
*If* someone one day found something that was "irreducibly complex" (and could prove that it was) then, and only then, would we have to consider that life was "designed".
