🚀 go-pugleaf

sschaff@roc.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Stephen F. Schaffner) writes:

>In article <1992Nov6.145757.26607@aee.aee.com>, gene@aee.aee.com 
>(Gene Kochanowsky) writes:

>|> 	Faith is the unquestioning acceptance of beliefs. This is important,
>|> if you question the beliefs, then you do not have faith. Ask any priest,
>|> minister, mullah, rabbi, shaman, witch doctor you come across. If you wish
>|> to become a "__________" (fill in the blank), then you must accept fully 
>|> the "_________" (fill in the blank) of "__________" (fill in the blank). 
>|> After this acceptance you will be "saved", "accepted into Vallhalla", be 
>|> able to "join your ancestors in piece" or what ever else makes you feel 
>|> comfortable with the after life.

>	This is complete nonsense.  There may be religious leaders who 
>demand unquestioning acceptance of belief, but I've certainly never met one.  
>As a matter of interest, how many have you actually asked?  Most religions 
>do indeed require some kind of intellectual commitment eventually, but in the 
>varieties I'm familiar with that commitment is compatible with continued 
>questioning.  

	What planet do you come from? It is not Earth. There can be no religion
without faith. With no faith, the congregation becomes a social club of like thinking
people. If you do not accept the common understanding of the word, look it up in
the dictionary. 

	Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary -faith 
		1. a: allegiance or duty to a person: LOYALTY b:
			fidelity to one's promises
		2. a: (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God
		      (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a
				religion
		   b: (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof
		      (2) : complete confidence belief in and trust in GOD.
		3. : something that is believed esp. with strong conviction esp.
			a system of religious beliefs.
		SYN see belief ANT doubt - in faith :
			without doubt or question : VERILY

	Or if you are a bible thumper try this quote for size:

		"proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing"

					      
	If there is any complete nonsense here, it is that a person can be truely
religious and scientific in his religion at the same time. It is absurd, illogical
and speaks volumes of misunderstanding on the part of that person of what is the 
basis of both science and religion.

>|> 	In Science everything is fair game for questioning. It is expected
>|> that everything will be questioned. 

>	Right.  I frequently hear scientists questioning the basic 
>trustworthiness of their senses and of other scientists, or the need to 
>test theories with experiments.  Come to think of it, 
>I have read postings from people like that on sci.physics, but they're 
>usually advocating some theory that involves space potatoes or hollow 
>planets, or the like.  You simply can't do science without the 
>"unquestioning belief" (usually unconscious) in the foundations upon which 
>it is built.

	Yes, you are absolutely right. In the last hundred years there have been
no scientists that have questioned the science of thier time. Not Rutherford or Bohr, 
or Einstien, or Shroedinger, not Feynman or Dirac. Gosh, it doesn't seem like any 
scientist has questioned the science of the day..... NOT. 

	And just maybe in the group of "space potato" scientist, as you call them, 
might be the next Einstien, or Dirac. That person will be heavily criticized, and 
scrutinzed, but, just maybe, if the person is right, the experiments will be done, 
and will prove thier point. That person will become the producer of new science.

	There is no such thing within a religion of producing "new religion". Its 
against the faith. When this has happened in the past, it has created violent reaction,
and a new religion of different beliefs, but no less rigid in its faith, while
simultaneously opposed to the old religion, which continues its exisitence. Witness 
the many flavors of Christainity, and the discord among them.

	The only sad thing about Mr. Shaffner's last statment is it shows a 
confusion, a thought process that identifies Science as a kind of religion. When I was
in grad school, it was common for the students of the time to rigidly oppose any
idea that the Science being taught at the time could be wrong. This was independent 
of any opposing idea, they had faith in what they were being taught. These grad students
were not scientist, they were preachers.  Because of this, I am afaid for science in
the US, this is the sort of thing that could kill it.

Gene Kochanowsky

-- 
Gene Kochanowsky                           | "And remember ....
Associated Electronic Engineers, Inc.      |       The better you look ... 
(904)893-6741 Voice, (904)893-2758 Fax     |       the more you will see."
gene@aee.com                               |               Miss Lidia