I was pushing on a specific area, that of the creationist theory, also arguments made by gandelf regarding proof of creationism over evolution. Simliar requests were made by Ankh. I dont find any paradox on being prepared and able to answer question regarding your beliefs. Infact the argument often made by people of faith, is that science and rationality is simply another form of faith.Sharkith wrote:First of all apologies Ankh my comments were aimed at this debate in general and I meant nothing personal to anyone. I disagree with these kinds of discussions because they are paradoxical. The person of faith is required to rationally justify themselves to the rationalist and the rationalist cannot get that faith is not rational. So all these sorts of dicsussions lead to is paradoxes of observation when two modes of looking at the world cross each other. What is there to be gained by that?
Since I posted the debate has once become centered on reason and rationality and this simply takes you further from even beginning to understand or even coming close to grasping what it is to go through the experience of faith. Unless you have really spoken with people who are deeply faithful you will always struggle to see what it means. This is not because of some insufficiency of reason on your part it is simply because you haven't experienced it.
Some of the most beautiful people in the world have the kind of faith that bring such a feeling of humility that when you look in their eyes all you can see is happiness. I know quite a few people like this muslims, christians, buddists and hindus. They might not all follow each others pretexts but none of them would ever condemn the other because none of the people I know who are deeply faithful would ever feel they were able to pass judgement on anyone else.
So please be very careful when you go ahead and stereotype this group of people and place them with the whores that tout faith in the interests of national security. All of that is kind of missing the point.
Alternatively we could turn the mode back on the beam of rationality and ask - is scientific rationality free from blame in the worlds conflicts and problems?
I doubt it is.
Regarding your last point (which is a divergence from my own personal thread I was pursuing here) - please expand on why you dont think it is free from blame.
I'd welcome a reasoned two way discussion on religion but it has to be just that - a two way discussion, not a one way thing as this thread has been thus far. When someone posts links to someone saying they'll pay $250,000 or whatever to anyone who can prove evolution inferring that as this guy hasn't paid this out no one can prove evolution as their "evidence" in the argument then you know it's pretty pointless even trying to discuss it, as pointless as trying to win that $250,000 because when you do provide the requested proof they just say "No you're wrong, there's no possible way to prove you're wrong but I say you are so tough you're not getting the $250,000".