> Reason wrote:
> > So what is the difference, in your opinion?
> > >From where I'm standing, religiosity looks like playing by
> someone else's
> > rules & spirituality is making your own rules. But both seem to be
> > representative of pretty much the same subjective, go-by-the-feel-of-it,
> > take-it-on-faith, anti-scientific-method approach to life.
> In my opinion, it is not "subjective" unless opposed to too
> limited a notion of "objective". It is defintely not
> "go-by-the-feel-of-it" as it often requires going against your
> feelings to do that which you would prefer not to but know
> should be done. It is not "take-it-on-faith" but take it beyond
> where logic and reason alone will take you. It is not
> anti-scientific-method but it is not limited to the scientific
> method as if it were the only oracle of truth or a capable guide
> to life.
* Could you be a little more specific on what exactly it is beyond logic and
reason that you are using here that doesn't involve taking something on
faith? What external and internal inputs determine knowing that something
should be done when you would prefer not to do it?
* What is too limited a notion of objective? I was always in the camp of
pretty hard and fast definitions of both subjective and objective.
* What definition would you give to "truth" that is different from
"something determined and proven by the scientific method"?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:27 MDT