by mindmelda 73 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
SBF, when you say
People who insist the loudest that they only care about "evidence" and nothing else are in danger of deluding themselves.
it come across a bit smug. can you be a bit constructive? aside reason and evidence, what else should be taken into account?
it come across a bit smug. can you be a bit constructive? aside reason and evidence, what else should be taken into account?
When evaluating a presentation of reality the important question to ask is not whether it is "true" (whatever that means) but rather its effects. For some people a certain presentation of reality can be useful, whereas for other people that same presentation of reality may be counterproductive. When people insist others should accept their "truths" it is merely an attempt to dominate the discursive landscape not a dispassionate strike in favour of objectivity. Who of us can say or can be certain that deep psychological factors are not as important or more important in the formation of our opinions than what we piously choose to call objective evidence?
Who of us can say or can be certain that deep psychological factors are not as important or more important in the formation of our opinions than what we piously choose to call objective evidence? - SBF
Me
mmm that makes a lot of sence actually. so basically one should sit down with whoever one disagree with and agree which ideas are being discussed before letting the arguments fly?
Me
You would have said the same when you were a Christian. You thought you had escaped previous delusions. Now you reckon you had simply swapped one delusion for another.
Who knows but that in scaling the walls of a prison for the second time you have not yet again landed in the courtyard of another?
Really? Science and healthy scepticism is a mental prison? Get real
All notions of truth are prisons of different sorts. I agree with Rorty that Truth is like God.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzynRPP9XkY&feature=related
For some people Jehovah's Witnesses are wrong because they don't have the truth.
My objection is more fundamental. I believe Jehovah's Witnesses are wrong because they believe there is a truth to be had.
The scientific method is a fantastic tool for revealing facts about our world and its success rate is staggering so far.
Religion has revealed not a single useful thing in thousands of years.
Even if we know nothing we know how to go about finding out.
There are lots of things we don't know and which may remain unknowable, I can live with that.
The scientific method is a fantastic tool for revealing facts about our world and its success rate is staggering so far.
I like that phrase "its success rate is staggering so far". In what sense do you believe the scientific method has a success rate? Can you name some failures that are purely a result of the method itself? Stictly speaking empiricists don't admit the method itself can ever be faulted, only that the method can be wrongly applied to give false results.
The scientific method came up with the finding that there was such a thing as race. I think we should call that result a mistake, not primarily because it unture, but because it resulted in biological anthropology, eugenics, and genocide.
Religion gave structure to society for thousands of years and continues to provide meaning for many individuals. Just as certain scientific narratives do for many today. Science takes no account of the fact that delusions other than its own may be useful. In that respect it resembles religion.
Both sides can't be right. This is more proof that ex-Jehovah's witnesses are clueless as to the nature of reality. After leaving Jehovah's Organization they collectively fold into a comfort zone that appeals to them; truth need not apply.
