<<Richard, you're defining words in a screwy fashion here.>>
[RB] I really think you only feel that way because you're the one being
screwed.
<<In what respect am I being screwed? This is an honest question; I can't
learn anything from your comment without an explanation.>>
I am attacking the faith-based foundations of your Level-2 belief system.
You refuse to believe you have any. Therefore my asserting that you have
them and even outlining them clearly seems off-the-wall to you initially.
<<A particular issue taken on faith may or may not contradict scientific
evidence, that was not the point. The point was that faith and the
scientific method are polar opposites.>>
I'm glad to see you share my faith in the scientific method.
<<[RB] How do we know that the scientific method works? It sure seems to...
>I mean I certainly have faith in it.
>
I answered that before... all that is necessary is the power of
observation.>>
Just like observation makes it "obvious" to Creationists that the universe
was designed by a Creator?
<<Are you saying that you don't see a difference between anecdotes and
measurable differences (e.g. differences in life expectancy in the last 200
years because of medical science)?>>
Whoa! Let's play "find the hidden presuppositions" in that last question.
You are assuming:
1. That some figures you have read about differences in life expectancy over
the last 200 years are accurate.
2. That medical science is responsible for such differences.
The first you are taking on faith. The second is a guess, one not even
shared by many experts if I remember correctly (I think sanitation gets the
nod for greatest influence in prolonged life).
<<If you're shooting arrows at a hypothesis, you are *not* taking a
faith-based position about it. Faith does not come into play until you
decide to accept it without evidence. Sorry to split hairs, but you're
throwing around the F-word inappropriately.>>
Here I am shooting arrows at YOUR faith-based positions and you can say
that? I don't know how else to reach you.
<<I'm not talking about emulating the personal lives of miserable people.
My
point was that there are a lot of miserable people out there who are also
brilliant and creative. To discount their genius because they are unhappy
seems like the height of prejudice. It's also not in our best interest.>>
I admit I am prejudiced against misery. And do you have any scientific
evidence to support your contention or is this another faith-based position
on your part?
<<I hope you don't take my comments on your personality to be negative
either, just descriptive.>>
I took them as a cheap shot.
Richard Brodie richard@brodietech.com http://www.brodietech.com/rbrodie/
Author, "Virus of the Mind: The New Science of the Meme"
http://www.brodietech.com/rbrodie/votm.htm
Free newsletter! Visit Meme Central at
http://www.brodietech.com/rbrodie/meme.htm