Why Do Many Reasonable People Doubt Science?

I totally agree with the bolded portion.

However, I was referencing the assertion that the aesthetics are subjective, not that the aesthetics are a derivative of truth. The poetry I see in science and nature, or the poetry others see in God, are both likely stemming from similar genetic traits that at some point provided an evolutionary advantage.

 

I could see some argue that theism actually is a genetic disadvantage because faith in a God to take care of you could put you at a disadvantage to work as hard.

 

I have no idea what statements you're referring to, but regardless if you actually read any of his books on the subject Dawkins belief in evolution is clearly motivated by specific evidence that has nothing to do with feelings or intuition.

 

I question the advantage to having a religious doctrine determine the guidlines of choice ..many religious folks don't rely on a supreme being to work hard..there are lazy atheists and lazy christians. When humans realize they can make intelligent choices..they evolve but not because they are told it's ok or don't have a supervisor to do that. I think written language and literacy have been the springboards of human advancement

 

I could see several viewpoints, but it makes sense to me that a belief in a god, in a shared contextual framework, would provide the scaffolding by which a community can work together, grow, trade, share, defend against outsiders, and many more things that could lead to a higher likelihood of genetic propagation.

I'm in the middle of reading a great book called Sapiens: a brief history of humankind by Yuval Noah Harari. A big part of the book is the assertion that humankind was able to develop past a family or tiny tribe based on it's unique ability to create shared myths. The belief in capitalism, religion, LLC's, Devine Right, or any mental construct allows some agreed upon principals by which people in a society can come together and build, work or grow together. Money for example is a shared myth, it is only worth something because of the social and political constructs that have created its concept. And so long as we all agree that money is something, I can sell my guitar to someone I don't know and have faith that the money I receive in return is an adequate exchange. Likewise, the shared myth of any specific god or religion provides the framework for people who have not met to work together and expand society. I recommend the book highly, it's very interesting and well researched. There are some ideas he proposes I agree with and others I don't but regardless he puts together some truly interesting concepts to think about.

 

Ok, wasn't asserting that aesthetics never have a common basis. By subjective I just meant different people have the same feelings as Mags does about different subjects.

 

cool.

I just get tired of the same back and forth discussions/arguments so I decided to interject a small twist into the conversation. I wasn't trying to be combative, just mainly bending the subject towards what I find interesting. Sorry if I derailed the thread.

 

That's usually my job!

 

Good point. I retract my statement

 

yeah I hear ya. I was trying not to engage Mags on "abiogenesis and the singularity"

 

The thread has been derailed a long time ago

 

Then don't bring up how only religion is based on faith

 

FIGHT!

 

the first rule of fight club is...nobody talks about fight club..but I've got 20 bucks on crowT to win it in a round and a half

 

That's a losing bet

 

I don't know, Crow is an MMA fan but Mags is one of those scrappy Asians. That's a close call.

 

mags will bring his guns

 

That's a cool read actually