tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post1854708996042991538..comments2023-09-25T04:26:51.568-06:00Comments on The Barefoot Bum: Sufficient pauseLarry Hamelinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-88143539659033197862008-02-01T10:46:00.000-07:002008-02-01T10:46:00.000-07:00Will eat for food - moi.Stay on groovin' safari,To...<I>Will eat for food</I> - moi.<BR/><BR/>Stay on groovin' safari,<BR/>Torhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03037704048671379868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-52004824215176017502008-01-31T14:19:00.000-07:002008-01-31T14:19:00.000-07:00I have to disagree a bit, but not with your primar...I have to disagree a bit, but not with your primary argument. I think when a majority of people do believe X on faith (i.e., with no evidence or even in the face of contradictory evidence), it does warrant discussion, research, and investigation. However, not discussion, research, and investigation as to the <I>truth value</I> of a nonsensical belief, such as belief in a deity or unicorn, but rather psychologically try to figure out why something like this would be believed by a majority. <BR/><BR/>I mean, there are "simple" answers, and then there are the real answers, and these may overlap. <BR/><BR/>There is obviously some need that such fabrication fills, or one could say that it has some (psychological?) function, and I think that warrants study, but not the study, though, that Hawthorne implies.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-80598008852679754692008-01-31T07:37:00.000-07:002008-01-31T07:37:00.000-07:00Yep, you can be "extremely brilliant" and still wr...Yep, you can be "extremely brilliant" and still wrong about all sorts of stuff. That's the tricky thing about intelligence: yes, it can help to overcome irrational preconceived dogmas, but it can just as easily serve to armour-plate those dogmas.<BR/><BR/>Some of the cleverest philosophy in history has been done by churchmen trying to make a coherent picture out of the scribblings of the Bible combined with the Vatican's political imperatives.Tom Freemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02997295899017354602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-67360280215041463002008-01-30T09:24:00.000-07:002008-01-30T09:24:00.000-07:00PhillyChief: No argument there.<B>PhillyChief:</B> No argument there.Larry Hamelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-4728217325003152022008-01-30T08:35:00.000-07:002008-01-30T08:35:00.000-07:00Also missing with the descriptions of "rigorous lo...Also missing with the descriptions of "rigorous logical analysis" are justifications for both why these people should be considered "extremely brilliant" and whether this brilliance is suited for this logical analysis. Too often in theist arguments they simply get any old guy with some alphabets after their name who happens to believe their crap to show off as validation. "Look, he's smart and he agrees with us so you should, too". Doesn't matter what those alphabets are for.PhillyChiefhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03355892225956705948noreply@blogger.com