soapboxing 2
Going back to my recent soapboxing post, my response to coffeerainbows was getting a little long and possibly a little off-topic, so I've set it as a separate post behind the cut.
The post was not directed at you. Although you've made the comment, I don't recall you ever specifically saying anything like "other people must believe in God because it's the only thing that makes sense". I have met people who do say that.
That said, yeah, it was a bit of a nudge. A friendly reminder. Water, for example...although it is mighty handy for life-as-we-know-it, current studies are expanding the range of life-possible. Studies on Earth have found life existing in boiling water, and in oxygen-less locations. People have been able to take "sludge" and give it electric shocks (to simulate lightning) and have developed the basic building blocks of life - thus we are better able to simulate whether or not life could begin in various conditions. Searches for planets around other suns have found conditions that aren't compatible with some of our current scientific models - meaning we need to re-visit the models. And beyond water...with all the conditions we find life existing in, where we thought things were too extreme...again one must consider the possibility of methane and other alternatives for the role of water in life.
So...at some point you heard the bit about water being essential to life. And for you, this was something that said "that's so amazing - there must have been a Hand in it, in life even being possible".
And now, if told that life might be possible without water's specific properties...I'm guessing you might plant your feet a bit. Water backs the belief of something you want to believe in, and you want to protect that. Understandably. But it's dangerous.
You're right; we should never stop asking questions. Science is, by definition, about asking those questions even when we don't want to. It keeps us honest.
In _all_ ways, believing in God is a matter of faith. And everyone believes in something. Sometimes they're not aware of it - sometimes beliefs are called axioms - but everyone builds their world-view on a basic set of assumptions. Even math and science start with a handful of basic beliefs, although they do try to keep them to a minimum.
Thing is, people should be aware of their axioms. And not expect that the only logical/sensible people are the ones that share belief in those axioms. Because that's saying that the only logic is a certain kind of belief...even though belief is the thing we do in the absence of logic.
My main gripe is usually with organized religions. There are quite a few current mainstream religions that warn their followers to steel their mind, or to close them, against any discussion that refutes the "one truth".
Dissent and discussion and questioning are good things - the result improves one's position if it is at all defensible, and forces one to make changes if it is not. But people need to be aware of each other's axioms in order to have a discussion involving compatible vocabulary. Which means being aware of their own axioms, and being able to admit them as beliefs.
The post was not directed at you. Although you've made the comment, I don't recall you ever specifically saying anything like "other people must believe in God because it's the only thing that makes sense". I have met people who do say that.
That said, yeah, it was a bit of a nudge. A friendly reminder. Water, for example...although it is mighty handy for life-as-we-know-it, current studies are expanding the range of life-possible. Studies on Earth have found life existing in boiling water, and in oxygen-less locations. People have been able to take "sludge" and give it electric shocks (to simulate lightning) and have developed the basic building blocks of life - thus we are better able to simulate whether or not life could begin in various conditions. Searches for planets around other suns have found conditions that aren't compatible with some of our current scientific models - meaning we need to re-visit the models. And beyond water...with all the conditions we find life existing in, where we thought things were too extreme...again one must consider the possibility of methane and other alternatives for the role of water in life.
So...at some point you heard the bit about water being essential to life. And for you, this was something that said "that's so amazing - there must have been a Hand in it, in life even being possible".
And now, if told that life might be possible without water's specific properties...I'm guessing you might plant your feet a bit. Water backs the belief of something you want to believe in, and you want to protect that. Understandably. But it's dangerous.
You're right; we should never stop asking questions. Science is, by definition, about asking those questions even when we don't want to. It keeps us honest.
In _all_ ways, believing in God is a matter of faith. And everyone believes in something. Sometimes they're not aware of it - sometimes beliefs are called axioms - but everyone builds their world-view on a basic set of assumptions. Even math and science start with a handful of basic beliefs, although they do try to keep them to a minimum.
Thing is, people should be aware of their axioms. And not expect that the only logical/sensible people are the ones that share belief in those axioms. Because that's saying that the only logic is a certain kind of belief...even though belief is the thing we do in the absence of logic.
My main gripe is usually with organized religions. There are quite a few current mainstream religions that warn their followers to steel their mind, or to close them, against any discussion that refutes the "one truth".
Dissent and discussion and questioning are good things - the result improves one's position if it is at all defensible, and forces one to make changes if it is not. But people need to be aware of each other's axioms in order to have a discussion involving compatible vocabulary. Which means being aware of their own axioms, and being able to admit them as beliefs.