![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
loosechanjI think my lack of opposition to Intelligent Design is due to the fact that I don't see Evolution as being particularly more valid than a properly expressed ID theory. Darwin gives people who don't want to feel beholden to any higher power the comfort of living in a universe without one, whether that's reality or not.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
#2 opens up the door to believing anything at all.
Date: 2005-10-30 12:59 pm (UTC)As for #1, what makes you have confidence?
For most scientists, it's provable results. For most religionists, it's...?
From my observations, I would say it's their trust in others. Since religions are "exempt" from proof, it cannot be trust in provable results. How does one prove God created the earth? One doesn't. But one has faith that the other guys who SAID God created the earth were telling the truth.
And that is blind trust, which makes it no better than #2.
To trust that gravity will always apply may not be 100% accurate (if you suddenly find yourself in space, for example), but it DOES rely on provable results. Every time I've ever thrown something up, it has either gotten stuck on some physical obstacle or come back down. So I have "faith" that gravity works. It's not blind faith, though, which is the key difference.
If a better theory comes along that explains it and more, I will probably switch beliefs.
Re: #2 opens up the door to believing anything at all.
Date: 2005-10-30 01:06 pm (UTC)Religion isn't exempt from proof.
Date: 2005-10-30 02:16 pm (UTC)Gravity may apply in space, but the uninformed observations would indicate that it didn't. And there may be places where gravity doesn't apply. Not being omniscient, I cannot say with absolute certainty that they don't exist.
But it comes down to who you gonna believe, and why. The why is a biggie.