|
|
|
Maverick
Skeptic Friend
Sweden
385 Posts |
 Posted - 08/29/2004 : 03:30:22 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
quote:
Originally posted by Maverick
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
Maverick, you may be missing my point. Of course everyone lies. Of course everyone is human. That wasn't the point. The point is when we lie we often don't think it is wrong, yet for some people, if you ask them if it is wrong they will say yes. So how do you square your beliefs with your actions? It can't always be done.
Yes, but even if most people say that lying is wrong, doesn't necessarily mean that they honestly believe it to be wrong in all situations, and that would mean that some people say it is always wrong, because that is what is expected of them to say, or, it wouldn't be good for them to say that lying is sometimes justified from their point of view, because that might make people trust them less.
That would be rationalizing, "lying is bad but this situation is different". I didn't say everyone believes lying is bad all the time. It was an example. A person can believe lying is bad but still lie. Why they do it isn't relevant. The fact that not everyone fits this description isn't relevant. Are you saying there is no such thing as cognitive dissonance?
No, what I think is that some people do think it's wrong in all situations to lie but still do it sometimes, but that others think it is wrong sometimes and right at other times and therefor there's no conflict for those people. But yes of course there is such a thing as cognitive dissonance, and I wasn't trying to say that there wasn't. I'm not very good at explaining what I mean, but I am trying.
quote:
quote:
quote:
What do you think? Does George W ask forgiveness for lying? Does he rationalize that it isn't lying if someone else says it? Or does he just not think about it at all? Those are the ways we deal with cognitive dissonance.
I doubt he will ask forgiveness for anything. I suspect that he knows, in many cases, when he's being dishonest, and no matter if he thinks it's right or wrong, he might think it is necessary to do it anyway.
Of course he would think it was necessary. And if you believe in the 10 commandments, and you believe god didn't list any exceptions, when you lie despite that belief most of the time people just do it and suppress the thoughts of it altogether. That's what happens with cognitive dissonance.
Ok, I do understand what you mean. I just think it's strange, that someone would believe in the 10 commandments and therefor that lying is always wrong, and then not even follow his own belief. But how do we know when it is this cognitive dissonance or when they simply lie about their beliefs?
quote:
quote:
..... I am confused though why evidence is demanded for some claims about the universe but not other. The existence of many of the gods would be extraordinary. Some of the claims are pretty big and not insignificant at all.
Which claims are you referring to?
That the entire universe was created within 6 days about 6000 years ago, that there was a global flood (even though the world is sometimes described as flat), that some 600 year old guy built a boat to save some animals, that god stopped the sun from moving across the sky, that the virgin Mary was brought to heaven to become pregnant, that Jesus existed and was the son of god or perhaps god himself, that he killed himself and then was resurrected... etc. |
"Life is but a momentary glimpse of the wonder of this astonishing universe, and it is sad to see so many dreaming it away on spiritual fantasy." -- Carl Sagan |
 |
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2004 : 07:21:18 [Permalink]
|
My uncle is a Ph.D. scientist and probably the smartest person I know. (He intimidates me, which isn't easy to do.) He's also deeply religious (Christian; Methodist, I think). I haven't asked him how he reconciles his scientific side with his faith, but I'll ask him next time he's in town.
My opinion on science and faith co-existing: for some of us, science and skepticism don't always answer certain spiritual questions satsifactorily. The "why are we here?" and "what does my life mean?" questions aren't always well-served by science. If needs and questions are truly spiritual, how can they be answered by non-spiritual means?
|
|
|
|
R.Wreck
SFN Regular
USA
1191 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2004 : 07:36:00 [Permalink]
|
Renae wrote:
quote:
for some of us, science and skepticism don't always answer certain spiritual questions satsifactorily. The "why are we here?" and "what does my life mean?" questions aren't always well-served by science. If needs and questions are truly spiritual, how can they be answered by non-spiritual means?
Do these questions even have answers, other than "I don't know"? Why is it so difficult to accept that we don't know why anything exists or what, if anything, it means? |
The foundation of morality is to . . . give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibliities of knowledge.
T. H. Huxley
The Cattle Prod of Enlightened Compassion
|
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2004 : 07:53:53 [Permalink]
|
R, some people do find answers to those questions other than "I don't know." You may disagree with their answers or even dismiss them, which is fine.
Everybody is different. That you don't need answers to those questions--or that you find "I don't know" or evolution to be a satisfactory answer--doesn't mean other people are or should be the same.
I have lots of parts within me. One part is skeptical, and it usually dominates. But not always...sometimes (not often) I need to feel connected to the world in a spiritual way. For me, that usually means meditating or connecting with nature or enjoying great art, 'cause I don't do religion. If my parts are in conflict, then they're in conflict; it no longer bothers me when they are. I enjoy being complex.  |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
Maverick
Skeptic Friend
Sweden
385 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2004 : 08:14:01 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Renae
My opinion on science and faith co-existing: for some of us, science and skepticism don't always answer certain spiritual questions satsifactorily. The "why are we here?" and "what does my life mean?" questions aren't always well-served by science. If needs and questions are truly spiritual, how can they be answered by non-spiritual means?
But how can any of the religions offer answers, other than made-up ones? If I search for the meaning of life, I may forget that maybe there is no meaning of life in general, or that there are many different individual meanings for each of us. "Why are we here" is an interesting question. Do you mean, why as in "what is our purpose" or as in "what made our existence possible"? Either way I can't see how religion has offered any useful answers that we couldn't come up with anyway. Sure, we can add all sorts of gods to the mix, but why? Can't we find out what we feel is right or wrong, or what the meaning of my life is, without inventing first the gods and then the answers and as a third step attribute those answers to those gods? |
"Life is but a momentary glimpse of the wonder of this astonishing universe, and it is sad to see so many dreaming it away on spiritual fantasy." -- Carl Sagan |
|
|
|
Maverick
Skeptic Friend
Sweden
385 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2004 : 08:19:53 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ricky
[...] and life means whatever value you yourself put into it.
Much like I imagine the theists does, only they also add a god. But perhaps a god is good to have. If someone criticize your answer to what the meaning of life is or why we're here, then you could always say "Don't blame me, god said it. There's nothing I can do!" |
"Life is but a momentary glimpse of the wonder of this astonishing universe, and it is sad to see so many dreaming it away on spiritual fantasy." -- Carl Sagan |
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2004 : 09:32:29 [Permalink]
|
Well, Maverick, you don't know that they're made up answers. You believe they're fiction, but they resonate deeply for others.
The biochemical answer is a scientific one and not a spiritual one. In fact, it doesn't address the spiritual question at all. If this is enough for you, great. It isn't enough for a lot of people, including me.
That you have a satisfactory answer to the question, or see no need for it, or dismiss others' answers doesn't make the question go away for many, many people.
Assuming a skeptic's way is The Way and The Answer feels intolerant to me. I have no more knowledge of the mysteries of the universe than anybody else.
Keep in mind, I'm a skeptic and my spiritual side isn't dominant. But it's spirituality (and love, etc.) that brings me peace and joy, not skepticism. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2004 : 10:37:53 [Permalink]
|
Why some people (including scientists) believe in god or feel comfortable being religious (not all religions have a god) cannot be answered simply. There are so many possible reasons include cultural, psychological and even physiological that I would withhold any value judgments made about those who do believe. It could even be as simple or complex as a survival mechanism that evolution has stuck us with...
I think you may find the following article informative.
Why People Believe in God An Empirical Study on a Deep Question
Humanist, ÊNov, 1999 Êby Michael Shermer
quote:
Shermer:
Several years ago I attended a most unusual conference at the Santa Monica Miramar Sheraton Hotel in southern California sponsored by the Extropy Institute. Founded in 1988, what is perhaps most striking about these "extropians" is the quasi-religious nature of their beliefs, including an almost faithlike devotion to science as a higher power. Scientism is their religion, technocracy their politics, progress their god. They hold an unmitigated confidence that, because science has solved problems in the past, it will solve all problems in the future, including the biggest one of all: death. For extropians, the vision of a paradisiacal future of longevity, intelligence, health, and wealth, delivered on the wings of scientific imagination, generates a loyal commitment (a type of faith) to a method, a body of knowledge, and a hope for a better tomorrow. Given their commitment despite their secular world view, perhaps faith is partly hard-wired in us all.
The rest of this article can be found at:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1374/is_6_59/ai_57800244/pg_1
It's a good read and pertinent to this discussion. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Maverick
Skeptic Friend
Sweden
385 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2004 : 11:04:56 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Renae
The biochemical answer is a scientific one and not a spiritual one. In fact, it doesn't address the spiritual question at all. If this is enough for you, great. It isn't enough for a lot of people, including me.
What is the spiritual question?
quote:
That you have a satisfactory answer to the question, or see no need for it, or dismiss others' answers doesn't make the question go away for many, many people.
A satisfactory answer to what, exactly? That spiritual question?
quote:
Assuming a skeptic's way is The Way and The Answer feels intolerant to me. I have no more knowledge of the mysteries of the universe than anybody else.
Keep in mind, I'm a skeptic and my spiritual side isn't dominant. But it's spirituality (and love, etc.) that brings me peace and joy, not skepticism.
Skepticism isn't what I'm made of either, many things bring me peace and joy, but religion isn't one of them. It gives nothing to me. Exactly what is it that god can give us that nothing else can? |
"Life is but a momentary glimpse of the wonder of this astonishing universe, and it is sad to see so many dreaming it away on spiritual fantasy." -- Carl Sagan |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
R.Wreck
SFN Regular
USA
1191 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2004 : 13:13:46 [Permalink]
|
Renae wrote:
quote:
some people do find answers to those questions other than "I don't know."
Renae, have you found any answers to those questions ("why are we here?" and "what does my life mean?") yet? Just curious what your skeptic/spiritual nature comes up with.
BTW, I don't "do religion", and do enjoy connecting with nature and good art also (not too big on the meditating though). I guess I don't define those as "spiritual". Spiritual, to me, has a conotation of another plane of existence populated by, well, spirits, which I just don't believe to exist. I do, however, understand the "buzz", for lack of a better term, that we humans get from such stuff. I don't see it conflicting with skepticism though. |
The foundation of morality is to . . . give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibliities of knowledge.
T. H. Huxley
The Cattle Prod of Enlightened Compassion
|
|
|
|
Maverick
Skeptic Friend
Sweden
385 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2004 : 21:28:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
Why some people (including scientists) believe in god or feel comfortable being religious (not all religions have a god) cannot be answered simply. There are so many possible reasons include cultural, psychological and even physiological that I would withhold any value judgments made about those who do believe. It could even be as simple or complex as a survival mechanism that evolution has stuck us with...
I think you may find the following article informative.
Why People Believe in God An Empirical Study on a Deep Question
Humanist, ÊNov, 1999 Êby Michael Shermer
quote:
Shermer:
Several years ago I attended a most unusual conference at the Santa Monica Miramar Sheraton Hotel in southern California sponsored by the Extropy Institute. Founded in 1988, what is perhaps most striking about these "extropians" is the quasi-religious nature of their beliefs, including an almost faithlike devotion to science as a higher power. Scientism is their religion, technocracy their politics, progress their god. They hold an unmitigated confidence that, because science has solved problems in the past, it will solve all problems in the future, including the biggest one of all: death. For extropians, the vision of a paradisiacal future of longevity, intelligence, health, and wealth, delivered on the wings of scientific imagination, generates a loyal commitment (a type of faith) to a method, a body of knowledge, and a hope for a better tomorrow. Given their commitment despite their secular world view, perhaps faith is partly hard-wired in us all.
The rest of this article can be found at:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1374/is_6_59/ai_57800244/pg_1
It's a good read and pertinent to this discussion.
Very interesting article indeed. First of all, the bit you quoted from it seems to show some sort of belief that science is not only the best we have today (which I am convinced it is), but that it is the ultimate and perfect set of methods. I can't agree to that, but I am very optimistic about the possibilities of science.
Also, I still would like to know why some extraordinary claims can get a "get out of jail for free"-card when others can't. Maybe you want to believe a certain thing, but if it's no basis at all for it and in many cases evidence against it, then where is the skepticism then? |
"Life is but a momentary glimpse of the wonder of this astonishing universe, and it is sad to see so many dreaming it away on spiritual fantasy." -- Carl Sagan |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 08/29/2004 : 22:00:10 [Permalink]
|
quote:
First of all, the bit you quoted from it seems to show some sort of belief that science is not only the best we have today (which I am convinced it is), but that it is the ultimate and perfect set of methods.
No scientist would make such a claim. They might certainly say that the tools of science are the best currently available... but the ultimate/perfect set of methods? Unlikely, as that would be ultimately self defeating.... why look for better if you already have perfection? |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 08/30/2004 : 07:46:21 [Permalink]
|
Dude wrote:quote:
No scientist would make such a claim. They might certainly say that the tools of science are the best currently available... but the ultimate/perfect set of methods?
Unfortunately, there is a growing group of people who express what's known as 'scientism', or the belief that science can - eventually - answer all of life's questions, and/or that nothing can improve upon the general "scientific method" as we know it now. It's a sort of scientific fanaticism, and it's not good, even if the people who have such beliefs are "on our side."
Ann Druyan, in a speech reprinted by Skeptical Inquirer last year, expressed some scientistic thoughts, and it had me shaking my head and wishing Carl Sagan were still around. Whether or not she intended to sound that way, I can't say (obviously). But, since this is a human foible - a sort of faith in materialism - I'm sure that at least a small sub-set of actual scientists really are guilty of scientism. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
)