Quote:
Originally Posted by freeztar
There's two options as far as I see it:
- disregard BS
- Succumb to it
|
I believe there is a third option:
The direction this thread has turned relates specifically, I think, to discussing what are the acceptable methods, not only here at Hypography but generally in public, of refuting people's unsupportable beliefs, and whether it is even necessary to do so.
First off, I would agree that it is important to maintain a personal level of integrity and respect when confronting ideas of which you don't agree, and I know from personal experience, this isn't always very easy to do. We are human. But allowing yourself to continually succumb to the tactics of personal ridicule is not only dishonorable, it will immediately cause your argument to be lost on those you are attempting to persuade because the focus will shift from the point of your argument to the resentment felt from your derision. So invariably, it's an ineffective approach.
I also believe it is important to learn to distinguish when it is even necessary to refute someone's beliefs. This site has been a great educator for me in this regard because it has helped me to differentiate between those who are expressing a belief, and those who are making a claim. I know it is often a gray area, but I think people should be allowed to believe as they so choose, even if it can be shown to be utter nonsense. But to make a claim, particularly in a public setting, is an invitation to be challenged and the challenges should commense. But the focus of the challenge should remain on the legitimacy of the claim, and not on the legitimacy of the person if respectful discourse and effective communication that seeks to achieve some form of understanding is to be maintained.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeztar
But, let's not forget that this is not the brunt of it. When's the last time a Catholic priest told you that science is bogus? The "attacks on science" are a small segment of religious expression (though perhaps it is more pronounced in your parts).
|
I think generally speaking, you are correct here, but I do agree with Moon that science must stay vigilant against the concerted efforts that are being made to inject religiosity into the public sphere. I don't believe that it is the business of science to rid society of religion, but it is the business of science to make research and findings available to the public and to have a voice that challenges false claims and misrepresentations of scientific information as well as the overall purpose and methods of science.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeztar
The best we can do is fight it away with the cold hard facts!  |
Yes, I agree with this. And this is the best way for science to raise it's voice and inform the public. Here in the United States, though, it may be necessary for science to be a bit louder or prevalent with what it has to say. But science will always be considered closed-minded by those who feel it is not supportive of the ideas that they have chosen to commit themselves, and it is no surprise that those ideas often emanate from religious teaching.
But have you ever noticed how much they rally around a scientific study relating to the positive effects of prayer?
Science is great, until it undermines your chosen and committed beliefs, and then it may appear threatening.
