Absolutely

Posted by GaDS on September 02, 1998 at 11:26:23:

In Reply to: Maybe, maybe not posted by Bob 2 on September 01, 1998 at 23:50:58:

: Look at what you are saying "Define", "straightforward", these are all terms obsessed with absolutes. "Abstract thinking" is just that, abstract, not absolute.

: These terms are merely futile efforts to make an absolute out of which there is no absolute. It’s driven by an obsessive inability to leave any lose ends open. ….Can’t figure it out, therefore "god" did it. "Abstract thinking" is saying, "maybe, maybe not".

: In the case of religious rationalizations. Religious apologists are often people who can think in the abstract, but aren’t interested one way or the other except as a means to an end, like a lawyer does. In most cases it’s a matter of keeping their jobs.

: As far as faith goes, that’s simply a form of denial.

It sounds as though you are claiming that absolutes are unique to religion. As I recall, there are very few absolutes in science as well, as all information is derived from our perceptions of what occurs. The Aristotelean system existed for centuries as a scientific absolute based upon supposedly objective observations of the world (much of that time admittedly due to the intolerance of the learned in the Catholic Church). Newtonian mechanics, again based upon what could be observed, was also considered an absolute. The belief that only religion errs on the side of "absolutes" is a mistaken one. Invent a god to explain the unexplainable in religion? How about the inventions of an element, a medium, and even an entire planet to explain the unexplainable in science? I refer to the fictitious element coronium deduced from unidentifiable spectral lines in the sun's corona, the electromagnetic ether to explain electromagnetic propagation in a vacuum, and the famous 10th planet to explain the wobble in Pluto's orbit. Science has always and always will propose things based upon their perception and understanding of things. In science the truth or error of beliefs is determined by confirmation of theory through experimenation. In religion people will attempt to comprehend God based upon that which is imperceptible but nonethless has reality to them. In religion, the truth or fallacy of God is determined by confirmation of divine action through exercise of faith. Argue whichever side you want, neither side can convince the other because they proceed from completely separate axioms which cannot extend beyond the inherent limitations of those axioms.

GaDS