Friday, December 15, 2006

Ah, the stubborness of belief

The above linked article by Richard Dawkins contains this excerpt:
Whatever the underlying explanation, this example suggests a fascinating, if pessimistic, conclusion about human psychology. It implies that there is no sensible limit to what the human mind is capable of believing, against any amount of contrary evidence. Depending upon how many Kurt Wises are out there, it could mean that we are completely wasting our time arguing the case and presenting the evidence for evolution. We have it on the authority of a man who may well be creationism’s most highly qualified and most intelligent scientist that no evidence, no matter how overwhelming, no matter how all-embracing, no matter how devastatingly convincing, can ever make any difference.
I've have often been guilty of it myself, and am on a relentless mission to change. I see it all the time. People start with what they want to believe, then only accept evidence that supports their belief. I have my beliefs, but I remind myself that they are based on incomplete knowledge and awareness. I'm open to considering contradicting points of view. When action is required, I will go with my beliefs. Of all I've read and heard, evolution makes the most sense, seems the most substantiated. But I'm not closed to the idea that there is some sentience involved in the process. I'm not going to buy into the dead-beat-dad model of fundamentalist christians--been there, done that, doesn't work--but some sort of creator seems at least possible.

Here's an interesting read on the same subject:


Blogger ΛΕΟΝΙΔΑΣ said...

Jeff' You are right to question "theories". They are not YET physical laws. I agree that evolution makes more sense than a fundamentalist interpretation of Genesis. But "what if" evolution were orchestrated by an outside intelligence? We will probably never know for sure. In the meantime let's allow for faith on both sides.
A devout agnostic.

7:38 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home