When Faith and Science Clash

[genkaus]

Also, I disagree that when a theist classifies an experience as god, that is a failure to use cognitive faculties. The act of classification puts it under cognition, regardless of whether it is the correct classification or not. I see this as a misuse of the cognitive faculties. Likewise, I think the mere act of classifying an experience as unknown would requiring engaging the cognitive falcuties, albeit a very tiny portion of those faculties. To me, it seems inevitable that as soon as we have any sort of experience, our brain is hardwired to classify that experience, thus utilizing cogntion.

That is sort of what I was saying: That while the classification of an experience as god is not a failure of using the cognitive facilities, the creation and integration of this category - which is required prior to the said classification, is. To put it in simpler terms, once you accept the concept of god as an all-powerful force deciding your fate, then, if yo attribute all experiences to god, you are using your cognitive faculties correctly. However, the error came before - at the point when you did accept such a concept. That was the point at which you failed to utilize cognition.

---

To a degree, this seems reasonable, whether said cognition is conscious or not.

Cognition is of course not necessarily rational or free from bias or distortion, and does not guarantee an correct or coherent answer, even within the constraints of one's own assumptions.

From my perspective, it is less useful to consider whether cognition has occurred, but rather to consider what degree it is being influenced by bias, distortion, and irrationality, as well as how coherent it is with one's assumptions and other beliefs.

Interesting argument. Wouldn't the processes causing bias, distortion and irrationality be something other than cognition itself? In which case, is it the faculty of cognition itself to blame or is it an error caused in its development?

To elaborate, we all are born without any cognitive faculties. And from some point after that we start developing these faculties. But each development uses whatever has been acquired before it as a basis. . Thus, ultimately, there would be many concepts that have been accepted at either face value or because they were accepted on the basis of other concepts that were taken at face value. My position is that any bias or distortion is the result of this failure to apply the cognitive thinking towards some of the concepts that you have accepted as true. In which case, it is not the faculty itself that is inherently untrustworthy, but the errors made in its development which can be corrected for. That while it is true that cognition is not necessarily rational or free form bias or distortion, it can be made so by finding the cause of the said bias and correcting the cognitive process by reapplying it to the principles that caused it.