ALFONSEC@EMDCCI11.BITNET (09/06/88)
Date: Mon, 05 Sep 88 11:47:24 HOE To: AILIST@ai.ai.mit.edu From: ALFONSEC%EMDCCI11.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU Comment: CROSSNET mail via SMTP@INTERBIT Date: Mon, 5 Sep 88 11:44 EDT From: ALFONSEC@EMDCCI11 To: AILIST AILIST@ai.ai.mit.edu Subject: Religion In >AIList Digest Saturday, 3 Sep 1988 Volume 8 : Issue 76 L. Adrian Griffis writes: >This is not to say that Science never indulges in this sort of intolerance >of beliefs. But at least Science as a whole does not state as part of its >fundamental platform that you must accept such and such a belief as fact, >without evidence and without question (regardless of what individual scientist >may do). This is a misunderstanding of what religious beliefs mean. First, it is false that they must be accepted without evidence. There is evidence. The clearest case is, of course, that of adults who become converted into a religion (there are scientists, too, in this class). They found the evidence sufficient for them. Mostly, however, it is not a "scientific evidence", rather a "historical evidence" or a "reasonable evidence". Second, it is true that, after the evidence has been accepted, a certain "obstinacy on belief" (in the words of C.S. Lewis) is required. But this is also true of other human beliefs (which amount to more than 99 % of all our knowledge, even to scientific knowledge). What would you say about a scientist who refuses to believe all those scientific facts which must be learnt on authority grounds and decides to test everything in practice? Science would not advance much if every scientist did that. Let me put a more convenient example. When we meet a person of the opposite sex, we first take some time to "get the evidence". At some point, we may be convinced that this person is appropriate as a spouse. We may marry this person. But later on, a certain "obstinacy on belief" is required. Or am I going to believe every slander that may come to my ears about my wife? Or, to be a good scientist, should I put her to the test? Devise an experiment to find out whether she is faithful to me under different conditions, for example? Perhaps, if I did that, I would be considered a good scientist, but certainly, too, a very devious person, or even a fool. Remember the story about Cephalus and Procris. M. Alfonseca