Hope I am not repeating someone(so much to read), hell, let it be said twice:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bnonn Science is not rational; it presupposes a number of things which are quite unjustified, and does not even claim to be able to justify them. For example, it presupposes a commonality of experience between people, which in turn presupposes people and an external world. It presupposes that our memories are reliable, and then, based on the this assumption and the fact that we remember the past being consistent, it fallaciously (inductively) infers that the future will be like the past, and arrives at the principle of the uniformity of nature. |
Come On! What the fuck do you do all day!! You blame non- uniformity of nature when you are late? Ever seen anything drop upward? Would your computer work if the transistors were not extremely unlikely to fail? How is it reasonable to think it ever behaved any different, based on a book 2kyr old?
Science is pretty damn rational. Why? Because it works.. Physics has been used in neigh-every human-made object you have used since birth. And it *is* a tool to get information, albeit physical.
I am sure the bible says some reasonable things, but also that there is plenty of crap in there. (maybe i should read it, so i can point out things next time) By the way, not believing our memories are reliable might well mean that people overwriting the bible might make mistakes too? What about translations? Also, people wrote the bible, not god, why believe them?
By the way, the bible somehow fails to mention how out of 5 × 10^22 observable stars god is somehow interested in what happens on the surface of a small planet near one. If it were so damn rational, why does it not re-assure us?