tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post116719530790311327..comments2023-10-24T04:29:23.693-06:00Comments on Atheist Ethicist: Faith HospitalAlonzo Fyfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-926212252181762442007-02-04T11:30:00.000-07:002007-02-04T11:30:00.000-07:00I've always felt similarly about the "Faith Publis...I've always felt similarly about the "Faith Publishing" of religious literature. I'm not just talking about he KJV-only people. I mean the Bible needs a new "Revised, expanded and featuring an all-new forward by Jesus" version.<br /><br />Stressing the unchangingness of faith isn't really a good way to win over the scientifically minded.Todd Sayrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12169001814438843191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-24336975595234086732006-12-30T17:34:00.000-07:002006-12-30T17:34:00.000-07:00I just noticed this article on yahoo, dated Dec 2...I just noticed this <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061227/sc_nm/usa_religion_medicine_dc">article</a> on yahoo, dated Dec 26th ... the same day as this post.<br /><br />I'll never understand why so many prefer blind faith respecting claims of the subjective, rather than placing their trust in objective scientific study.<br /><br />In any event, I thought the article might be of interest.bpabbotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17047791198702983998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1167439448394913322006-12-29T17:44:00.000-07:002006-12-29T17:44:00.000-07:00@nullok, I'm on page with you :-)Respecting my per...<STRONG>@null</STRONG><BR/><BR/>ok, I'm on page with you :-)<BR/><BR/>Respecting my personal opinion, I also agree that there are no <EM>truths</EM> that lie beyond objective study ... at least no relevant ones.<BR/><BR/>This is, of course, my belief and not my <EM>knowledge</EM>.<BR/><BR/>However, in that there are multitudes who do believe subjective truths exist, I think it prudent and wise to give their world-view room with in our society ... meaning that I don't specifically support their view, but do support any other individual's liberty to do so.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1167404959989649892006-12-29T08:09:00.000-07:002006-12-29T08:09:00.000-07:00@bpabbott As I understand our comments, I do not a...<B>@bpabbott</B><BR/><BR/><I> As I understand our comments, I do not agree. Your position implies both that (i) an objectively valid answer exists for any question, and (ii) all questions are objectively valid ... correct?</I><BR/><BR/>You misunderstood me, then. In fact, I did quite the opposite. I explicity emphasised the condition that "... <B>if</B> there is a definitive answer, then science would be able to answer this with sufficient investigation, resources, etc.". This doesn't, of course, preclude <I>looking</I> for an answer, but I do not claim that all questions are objectively valid.<BR/><BR/><I>Further claiming that it is possible that all gaps in human understanding, whether objective or subjective, may ultimately be filled by an objective methodology is no more than a matter of faith ... and if we restrict ourselves to the "subjective" the idea appears to me to be faith of the blind kind :-(</I><BR/><BR/>I would completely agree. In fact, I also explicitly stated "[w]hether or not this is within the grasp of humanity, I wouldn't like to speculate" to support this. Of course, this would only happen under the previous condition being filled that there <I>was</I> an answer to the question. If the question is unanswerable, no amount of investigation will yield a <I>true</I> result.<BR/><BR/>My original point was in disagreement to the assertion that you made that you think "there are 'truths' that lie beyond objective study". I understand that this is your opinion, I was just disagreeing (and explaining why I do).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1167384776004671052006-12-29T02:32:00.000-07:002006-12-29T02:32:00.000-07:00Sadly, the Faith Hospital has already caused the v...Sadly, the Faith Hospital has already caused the vey real death of these two infants in New Zealand:<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://subs.nzherald.co.nz/search/story.cfm?storyid=7C38EACE-39E0-11DA-8E1B-A5B353C55561" REL="nofollow">Caleb Nathaniel Tribble</A> and <A HREF="http://subs.nzherald.co.nz/search/story.cfm?storyid=22574F62-39DD-11DA-8E1B-A5B353C55561" REL="nofollow">Caleb Moorhead</A>J.L.https://www.blogger.com/profile/05769831982514374661noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1167376963969340602006-12-29T00:22:00.000-07:002006-12-29T00:22:00.000-07:00Very, very nicely done.I wonder which wacko would ...Very, very nicely done.<BR/>I wonder which wacko would opt for curing leprosy by dipping a live dove in dead dove blood. Leviticus 14:1-8. Or is the leper colony out back?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1167375618724114722006-12-29T00:00:00.000-07:002006-12-29T00:00:00.000-07:00Excellent, excellent article. No christian would ...Excellent, excellent article. No christian would really choose Faith Hospital; yet this is what they espouse daily.<BR/><BR/>Great analogy. It really sums it up.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1167341499545851332006-12-28T14:31:00.000-07:002006-12-28T14:31:00.000-07:00@nullyou commented: While I see what you might hav...<STRONG>@null</STRONG><BR/>you commented: <EM>While I see what you might have been trying to achieve by asking these questions, I think your assertion is false. If you ask "What is the purpose of the universe?" and if there is a definitive answer, then science would be able to answer this with sufficient investigation, resources, etc.</EM><BR/><BR/>As I understand our comments, I do not agree. Your position implies both that (i) an objectively valid answer exists for any question, and (ii) all questions are objectively valid ... correct?<BR/><BR/>Further claiming that it is possible that all gaps in human understanding, whether objective or subjective, may ultimately be filled by an objective methodology is no more than a matter of faith ... and if we restrict ourselves to the "subjective" the idea appears to me to be faith of the <EM>blind</EM> kind :-(Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1167323413788206162006-12-28T09:30:00.000-07:002006-12-28T09:30:00.000-07:00Excellent article.@bpabbottYou wrote: "[T]hese que...Excellent article.<BR/><BR/><B>@bpabbott</B><BR/>You wrote: <I>"[T]hese questions are non-objective in nature, and therefore, do lie outside the realm of science."</I><BR/><BR/>While I see what you might have been trying to achieve by asking these questions, I think your assertion is false. If you ask "What is the purpose of the universe?" and <I>if</I> there is a definitive answer, then science would be able to answer this with sufficient investigation, resources, etc. Whether or not this is within the grasp of humanity, I wouldn't like to speculate. At the moment, I don't know of any scientific hypothesis (Douglas Adams aside) to deal with this, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a 'true' answer out there.<BR/><BR/>However, if there <I>isn't</I> a definitive answer, we might look to philosophy (or its bastard offspring in the form of religion) to provide a "placeholder", but it wouldn't be 'true', just something that offers an 'answer', something to the satisfaction of the person posing the question. It seems that this is the route most people take at the moment - and it appears that some take comfort from this. It doesn't make it 'true', though.<BR/><BR/>I would come to the same conclusion as above for your second question, although being more personal it may be more difficult to "answer" to the satisfaction of the individual.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1167260950704759172006-12-27T16:09:00.000-07:002006-12-27T16:09:00.000-07:00Alfonzo,Kudos! ... that was perhaps the best essay...Alfonzo,<BR/><BR/>Kudos! ... that was perhaps the best essay/blogging I've read regarding the conflict produced by religion's self induced delusion that non-objective musings are comparable in merit and reliability to objective methodology.<BR/><BR/>With respect to; "religion claims to have the capacity to provide benefits outside of the realm that science can measure"<BR/><BR/>I do think there are "truths" that lie beyond objective study. Ultimate questions such as (1) What is the purpose of the universe?, or (2) What is the purpose of my life?<BR/><BR/>While these questions may appear ill conceived, or moot, to some, they are of substantial importance to others.<BR/><BR/>Respecting my implied context, these questions are non-objective in nature, and therefore, do lie outside the realm of science.<BR/><BR/>In my opinion, your treatment regarding inappropriate religious extrapolations is excellent, and while I find your efforts inspiring, I wonder how many theists see such critique as blasphemy :-(<BR/><BR/>Personally, I find the incorporation of materialism in religion as a perversion ... a "blasphemy" to borrow the word ;-)<BR/><BR/>What are your thoughts of addressing such religious practices by critiquing their appropriateness on religious ground? <BR/><BR/>As you have likely inferred, I think pointing of the realm of "truth" that is uniquely religious, and the virtues that religion can have regarding individual happiness and fulfillment is also deserving of effort.<BR/><BR/>It is a perspective I think Dawkin's and others could incorporate ... and thus reach a much broader audience.bpabbotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17047791198702983998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1167252499332268322006-12-27T13:48:00.000-07:002006-12-27T13:48:00.000-07:00Excellent post! I encourage you to submit this to ...Excellent post! I encourage you to submit this to all relevant blog carnivals, and I plan to hype it on my blog as well. Everyone needs to read this one. <BR/><BR/>The notion of Faith Hospital as you have described it here is a very effective way to prove your point. I wonder how many Christians would select this hospital over the scientifically-based hospital if given the choice?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1167250623069162532006-12-27T13:17:00.000-07:002006-12-27T13:17:00.000-07:00Alonzo,Your discussion of Faith Hospital and Scien...Alonzo,<BR/><BR/>Your discussion of Faith Hospital and Science Hospital provide a clear presentation of one of the great advantages of the scientific method.<BR/><BR/>I think the concept is also useful as an adjunct to your concept of using praise and condemnation to mold malleable desires in a system of morality.<BR/><BR/>You may be effusive in your praise or vehement in your condemnation, but if I have no reason to care about your opinion, I may easily ignore you. On the other hand if you are able to show or convince me that what you object to is actually thwarting some of my own desires or goals, you may be much more effective.<BR/><BR/>To draw a sports analogy, a coach might complain to a receiver that not running the prescribed routes is not a good thing. But it might be more effective to show the receiver a few game films where the receivers who caught the most passes were the ones who ran correct routes.<BR/><BR/>The facts make the receiver see the desire to run freely is thwarting his desire to catch passes. Not only does he fail to catch passes, but he contributes less to the team and makes it more likely the team will lose. I suspect for most players a clear awareness of those facts would be much more effective that praise or condemnation of the coach.<BR/><BR/>Of course in many situations making the facts clear can be much more difficult, but where we can bring facts to bear we have the opportunity to build common moral and ethical views across cultural and religious boundaries.<BR/><BR/>In nearly all cases the most effective tool for change is the individual. When that individual can clearly see all the consequences of an action or desire, the best choice for that individual is usually (not always) the best choice for others as well. Those that achieve that become the kind of ethical people we all prefer to live with.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com