Re: This War Is Not About Terror, But About Islam (Article)

From: Samantha Atkins (
Date: Tue Oct 09 2001 - 02:20:29 MDT

Olga Bourlin wrote:
> From: "Samantha Atkins" <>
> > "Robert J. Bradbury" wrote:
> > >
> > > While I normally grant almost all posters to the extropian list
> > > a huge grain of salt, I must state that IMO the article by David
> > > Selbourne was entirely useless.
> > >
> > > It was nothing more than a rundown of a position based on opinions
> > > unsubstantiated by facts.
> > >
> > > Islam, Catholicism, Hinduism, Buddism, etc. are faiths based
> > > on the "blind" belief of one reality over another. Since they
> > > are cannot be subjected to scientific debate, they are useless
> > > from an extropian perspective.
> >
> > Is that a blind belief? Scientific validation is not the only
> > way to come to what one considers valid ...
> There is, of course, subjective validation (as in anecdotal evidence), but
> scientific validation is consistenly the "best" evidence.

Really? Across the board? Tell me, what scientific methodology
to you use to determine you are in love? that you are happy?
that a painting is really good (or bad)? that a person is or is
not to be trusted and how much?

> >... and crucially important.
> Certainly subjective validation may be crucially important (yet that won't
> make a particular belief more "true," but rather more "preferred" by
> someone).

see above.
> > Many spiritual systems do not require blind faith but consist of
> > a series of exercises and practices possibly leading to a
> > validation of a way of being in the world that is seen as of
> > great value. Some of these sorts of practices exist within all
> > of the major religions and outside of them as well. But I am
> > sure you are aware of this also. So why speak as if religion is
> > just about "blind belief"?
> Even stone sober 20/20 belief is not as good as science, because science is
> BEYOND belief. And that, IMHO, makes science a more serious pursuit for
> those interested in critical thinking, rationality, and succinctness. (The
> habit of scientific critical thinking may be an acquired taste for some, but
> once acquired ...yummmmmm.)

What you are a proposing IS a belief. Science is a really,
really good tool for an important class of things. It is not
the only tool or the best tool for all things.

- samantha

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:12 MDT