Quote:
Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA
Again, that's to you, but not to many adherents (regardless of their brand affiliation).
There's nothing I'm more certain of than my own religion, there's no level of proof that exceeds what a believer knows in their heart.
(Where's Skydog when I need him? Maybe he could articulate this better/differently, plus it would have the advantage of getting more attention for the message than the messenger)
|
This. I didn't have the same weirded out reaction as some on this forum towards JIMG's original statement, though Jon and I don't agree all that much on stuff, because he's quite right when discussing things from the point of view of the believer. The believer's faith is quite true and certain, and comes from a powerful experience, while some scientific principles may be murky (heck, most intelligent people have some issues with quantum physics).
I definitely do not believe that the principles and beliefs of a particular religion need to be introduced into the school system (no freaking way should creationism be taught in science class), but the way to do it is NOT to demean someone's strongly held belief, but to acknowledge that it is certain to that individual but the school ciriculuum is for all individuals and thus should include that which is scientifically provable rather than a revealed truth that everyone has not experienced.
That was a mismash, but what I'm getting at is that you can get farther by respecting peoples' faith and the truth they feel in that faith than you can by putting it odds with science (and you can even blend faith and science as people like Francis Collins, the former head of the Human Genome Project, have done).