virus: Logic and Purpose

Reed Konsler (
Tue, 21 Oct 1997 22:14:12 -0400 (EDT)

>Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 17:40:48 -0600
>From: David McFadzean <>
>I still believe there is a positive correlation
>between bad beliefs and faith-based beliefs. Anecdotal evidence isn't
>going to decide the matter, I'm sure someone produce as many examples
>on one side of the issue as someone else can produce on the other.
>Any ideas??

1) Belief in God must not be very adaptationally problematic either to
the individual hosting the belief or a society comprised of said individuals.
This is obvious given the fact that societies and individuals continue to
thrive and complexify while hosting such memes. As a result you can
logically claim, at best, that more people would thrive better if they
did not believe things without recourse to evidence. To assert that such
beliefs will lead to inevitable doom is counter to historical evidence.

2) There are a number of examples of cultures which thrive and progress
hosting mythological/religious/mystical belief systems. There are no examples
of cultures which thrive without these systems. Therefore you have no
evidence that it is even possible to have culture without religion, broadly
defined. Even your attempt to create "a rational alternative to faith" (CoV)
is conflicted over this issue.

3) Isn't is necessary for you to prove that such a coorelation between beliefs
held despite evidence and "bad beliefs" exist? Otherwise it is an assumption
that you hold without recourse to evidence...a "faith-based" beilef. I would
hope that in doing so you will not make reference to straw-man arguments
like "If I believe fire won't burn me, I will get hurt" or the more tabloidesque
expolits of snake handlers and Christian Scientists and concentrate on the
more common and universal aspects of faith, which you claim you are


Reed Konsler