Comments on: The End of the Age of Reason — Revisited

By: Ronnie Fredman

Ronnie Fredman — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 16:23:55 +0000

Herber Spencer wrote:
“There is a principle which is bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance–that principle is contempt prior to investigation.”

The skeptic/cynic disguised in the garb of scientist and philosopher may respond, what in faith can we investigate? The obscurantist disguised in the pious robes of religion may ask while staring over his parchment, what is the use of science and reason?

If faith asks us to define hope, purposefulness, and the moral measure of intention and action? If faith asks us to debate the ‘absolute’ meaning of justice and value? If faith demands that we strive to measure the infinite, that there is a personality so powerful and so great that this personality is concerned about and may even act upon or through the most trivial, does this not spark the imagination, the curiousity, the drive which inspires the arts and sciences?

And if scientific reason cares to make Man the measure of the universe, with all our strengths and weaknesses; cares to cast reason into a void and derive a rule; cure diseases which have fouled us since the beginning; what can a man of faith argue? That man is too weak; but, a true man of science has humility, he should know that. That man is limited; just look up into the stars, we know that.

But, how can man operate without faith, or hope, or a sense of right and wrong? And, why is the progress of mankind, whose qualities and features are open to debate, a worthwhile endeavor?

I think where faith and reason border each other, curious things become curiouser. And, that is for the good.

By: torahideals

torahideals — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:16:58 +0000

I usually don’t publish comments that resort to name-calling, but this one is such a perfect example of the level to which “rational” debate has devolved that I can’t pass it up.

As I’ve said again and again, the lengths of dogmatic illogic to which the anti-religious will go is truly breathtaking. Scientists have no explanation for how or why the Big Bang could have happened, no fossil evidence for macro-evolution, no reasonable theories for how life on earth began in the first place (aliens space-seeded the galaxy, some suggest, or amino acids expanded into life by “riding on the back of crystals”), no reasonable explanation for why there is far more energy in the universe than can be accounted for by stars and far more matter than can be accounted for by visible mass — but it is adherents of religion who are accused of intellectual dishonesty and chastised for their faith.

This is the kind of twisted reasoning that was largely the subject of my post, which one has to wonder whether the commenter even read.

For a more thorough discussion on this matter, please visit:
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0401/disorder.html

By: scaryreasoner

scaryreasoner — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 05:04:41 +0000

The problem here is faith. Faith, believing something to a degree of certainty which exceeds what is warranted by the available evidence, is inherently and inescapably dishonest, in that it involves lying to yourself about how certain you should be about whatever it is that you have faith in. Faith is not a virtue, faith is a failing. Faith is a lie you tell yourself: “self, It is good if I can believe that X is true.” Already you have failed, regardless of whether X is true or not. By telling yourself that it is good if you can believe X, you have deliberately biased yourself in favor of the conclusion that x is true. Put starkly, by doing this, you have lied already. It is neither good nor bad to believe some proposition X, it merely comports with reality, or fails to comport with reality. If you wish that your beliefs should comport with reality, telling yourself things like, “self, it is good if I can manage to believe X” is not a method which is likely to lead to beliefs which comport with reality. In short, and to put it bluntly, the very concept of faith is blatantly and in-your-face idiotic. It is a concept very obviously expressly designed to help convince a person to believe things which do not comport with reality.

To put it even more bluntly, all religions are VERY VERY OBVIOUSLY idiotic, and if you’re a member of a religion, YOU are being VERY VERY OBVIOUSLY idiotic.