Saturday, August 20, 2005
I Believe
Conversations on one's back porch navigate a variety of topics. I did threaten to address both science issues and "stuff." So...
Two statements are causing a lot of trouble these days: "I believe in God;" and, "I believe in evolution." The assertion being argued across our nation is that these statements are somehow mutually exclusive.
believe 1) To accept as true or real, 2) To credit with veracity.
Based on these definitions, the two statements appear to have an equal standing. Applying the principle of parsimony (Ockham's Razor) we all know science, and evolution in particular, are difficult. The reasonable (and reasoning) person, could therefore take the simplest of the two statements: I believe in God. The explanation for everything is "God did it," and that is all we have to know.
The statements, however, are not mutually exclusive and it is possible to accept both. It is the common usage of the word, believe, that obscures the matter. Every individual constructs a view of the universe and the way it works by relying on senses, personal experiences, values, and the experiences of others. Each of us has a paradigm that structures our interaction with the world. We accept things about the world for differing reasons. One reason is faith, a belief accepted as true in the absence of logical proof or material evidence. The other reason hinges on what we consider proof or evidence.
People tend to accept as evidence those statements that reinforce their world view (beliefs). Evidence may be accepted for many reasons. For example, some persons advocating the veracity of UFOs and alien abductions accept that aliens have inserted small metal rods into the noses (brains?) of abductees. This statement is tenaciously defended and is said to be proof of alien abductions, even though no medical evidence of such devices has ever been found.
In considering some proposition, scientists rely on evidence collected under a rigourous set of rules adopted specifically to avoid the difficulties of intentional fraud, self-delusion, negligence, bias, and any number of human frailties or instrumental error. So, when a scientist says "I believe in evolution," what is implied is "I accept that the preponderance of evidence gathered, peer reviewed, and published according to accepted scientific practice supports the theory of evolution." This certainly leaves plenty of room for faith, so the same scientist may also say without compromise, "I believe in God."
Two statements are causing a lot of trouble these days: "I believe in God;" and, "I believe in evolution." The assertion being argued across our nation is that these statements are somehow mutually exclusive.
believe 1) To accept as true or real, 2) To credit with veracity.
Based on these definitions, the two statements appear to have an equal standing. Applying the principle of parsimony (Ockham's Razor) we all know science, and evolution in particular, are difficult. The reasonable (and reasoning) person, could therefore take the simplest of the two statements: I believe in God. The explanation for everything is "God did it," and that is all we have to know.
The statements, however, are not mutually exclusive and it is possible to accept both. It is the common usage of the word, believe, that obscures the matter. Every individual constructs a view of the universe and the way it works by relying on senses, personal experiences, values, and the experiences of others. Each of us has a paradigm that structures our interaction with the world. We accept things about the world for differing reasons. One reason is faith, a belief accepted as true in the absence of logical proof or material evidence. The other reason hinges on what we consider proof or evidence.
People tend to accept as evidence those statements that reinforce their world view (beliefs). Evidence may be accepted for many reasons. For example, some persons advocating the veracity of UFOs and alien abductions accept that aliens have inserted small metal rods into the noses (brains?) of abductees. This statement is tenaciously defended and is said to be proof of alien abductions, even though no medical evidence of such devices has ever been found.
In considering some proposition, scientists rely on evidence collected under a rigourous set of rules adopted specifically to avoid the difficulties of intentional fraud, self-delusion, negligence, bias, and any number of human frailties or instrumental error. So, when a scientist says "I believe in evolution," what is implied is "I accept that the preponderance of evidence gathered, peer reviewed, and published according to accepted scientific practice supports the theory of evolution." This certainly leaves plenty of room for faith, so the same scientist may also say without compromise, "I believe in God."
