Do we expect too much from human reason?

[The Grand Nudger]

It doesn't automatically follow, no - but in making this statement he's leveraging reason.....so there's that. I think that anyone who's studied either philosophy or logic will realize that no one made that assumption or leap at all, and that reason has been a learning process itself. We've had the "rules" wrong before, and it lead us to conclusions which we later found means to demonstrate inaccurate, thus the model was inadequate. So long as our system of logic models the behavior of the universe as we experience it, it will be qualified to give competent answers to the "biggest and most fundamental". I do think that some people expect to much, but I sometimes wonder why people expect so much from a statement that goes like so:

"-if- a, then b, a therefore b" - the provision was supplied with the very first word. Further provision is supplied in that what we plug in must be descriptive and accurate, for the system to work...and yet further provision is supplied in that the system itself must be descriptive and accurate - to accomplish that work. I don't see what room faith has in any of that.......reason has limits, and many of those limits are well delineated, some may not be(as above, we've been there before)....but we can only work with what we have - and who expects anyone or anything to do work it makes no claim to, and is expressly stated as not being capable of?

IMO, the author isn't doing much in the way of deep thinking, more like excusing faith on ground leveling terms. This is demonstrated in the manner in which the author chooses to approach faith from the very start, as a giver of comfort and meaning...and proven no less, beyond doubt (despite there being a whole range of doubts a to whether or not faith is accomplishing this at all, many of which we discuss here)! I doubt that anyone would be able to assess the relative comfort or meaning granted by faith set against the discomfort or meaninglessness caused by the same. I don't even know how such a study would be accomplished or why we would trust it's results. I certainly doubt that this claim and it's resulting bafflegab is a fact of any sort, or that the author has any knowledge that would put him/her in a position to make such a claim. To then go on and cast doubt on the very method the author is using to make further statements leaves him.her in the category of "demonstrated bullshitter".

It's an assertion put forward as a setup for an excuse. No shits are given.
(the rest of the site is lukewarm trash as well, but I'm sure they circle the drain with something legit every now and again...after all, we manage, between the titty jokes and dick puns, eh?)