RE: Atheism Undermines Knowledge
May 7, 2013 at 12:12 pm
(This post was last modified: May 7, 2013 at 12:22 pm by Whateverist.)
(May 7, 2013 at 11:51 am)ChadWooters Wrote:(May 7, 2013 at 11:39 am)whateverist Wrote: Apparently the capacity for language and discursive thought had utility because we've sure gotten a whopping big share of that by comparison with other animals.Yes, reason has utility. However, reason works because the world is reasonable.
Hmmm. Seems a bit like saying bats are able to navigate in the dark because the world is sonar-able. True but I'm not sure what the point of saying so might be for either the bat's sonar or our reason.
(May 7, 2013 at 11:51 am)ChadWooters Wrote:(May 7, 2013 at 11:39 am)whateverist Wrote: Now if you don't accept evolution (i.e., natural selection), then this point will be lost on you since you won't accept the premise. Do you accept the premise?I accept natural selection. I also accept that we have evolved to recognize features of reality not all of which are lunch. And we can do so because reality has an inherent order to which we can be attuned. If the only 'purpose' of reason is to get lunch then there is no reason to assume it works for abstract ideas.
This is precisely my point. Just because we have this faculty in the greatest degree of any creature on planet earth (as far as we can tell), is no reason to assume it fool proof. I am especially wary of reasoning from the logical implications of the categories we impose on the world to how things must in fact stand in the world. That the world is reasonable is always a test of the adequacy of our categories and observations. The world is as indifferent to our attempts to make it reasonable as it is to the bat's attempts to apply echo-location. Any failing of reasonableness will always be our own failing, not the world's.