Replies

If you have a flawed theory of how to build an airplane, and you insist on the theory, the airplane will correct it by crashing to the ground."

Too shallow...perhaps it'd be better to say as "necessarily both necessary and sufficient" for proof.

No, I stated my reasoning. The above would be another discusion.

Leave it for now; I interpreted your remarks as saying that *most* or *all* religious people of a certain bent reject experimental evidence; in my experience it is not that they always reject experiment on principle, but that they do not consider experimental evidence to be *absolutely* and *always* the last word...they reserve the right of skepticism towards scientific findings.

Sometimes it is due to the suspicion a given experiment was flawed, or was executed poorly, or they have philosophical reservations.

You can find similar attitudes towards mainstream *medicine* by those who advocate non-traditional, or holistic, or nutritional treatment of diseases. It is not exclusively religious in origin.

I would ask how many airplanes were built on faith?

That wasn't my point--my point is that I was able to quote a well known anti-evolutionary author who nonetheless endorsed empiricism and logical thought. It was a counterexample to the claim you had made in an earlier post.

If you wish to say "many such people" reject empiricism, or even "most anti-evo people on the crevo threads" I'd agree.

Cheers!

If you wish to say "many such people" reject empiricism, or even "most anti-evo people on the crevo threads" I'd agree.

I agree with your observation and conclusion. Sometimes I can be a bit hasty when considering the position of todays creationists. What is particular annoying and in my opinion a disservice to both empirical science and philosophy is the lack of observance to the origin of both. I speak of Plato who is accepted as the western worlds father of philosophy and his student Aristotle. In particular Aristotle who some arguable proclaim the worlds greatest philosopher could also be argued as the father of science. I refer to the fact that he invented, developed, and named the basic fields of science that were required to test his philosophy. It would seem to be inherent in Aristotle's beliefs that one's philosophy grows in strength with empirical inquiry and that the error or fact in one would test the error or fact in the other.