ID as a Cultural Phenomenon (Humans)

by dhw, Saturday, September 26, 2009, 22:07 (5535 days ago) @ xeno6696

There's no real disagreement between us on any of the points you raise, and no-one but the most hardened fundamentalist would say the data are conclusive, but I find the discussion interesting in itself, so I'll follow it up if I may.-I'd wondered if David and George would agree with you that their conclusions were based on philosophical predisposition, and David confirmed that his were. You wrote: "If you do not have actual knowledge about the creator, all you are doing is airing opinion or conviction." No-one can argue with that. But in no context that allows for different viewpoints (religion, morality, aesthetics, politics) can conclusions be based on actual knowledge, so what are they based on? It's the word "predisposition" that I hesitate over, as it seems to suggest that conclusions are reached by fitting evidence to conviction rather than the other way round. It's a murky field. Once someone has reached his conclusion, he may well subconsciously begin to manipulate the evidence, but has he reached the conclusion because of his philosophical predisposition? If we take the real-life case of a Jew who became an agnostic who became a panentheist, what conclusions are based on predisposition and what on evidence? One can hardly argue that interpretation of the evidence depends on the philosophical predisposition if the philosophical predisposition has undergone a double change! -On the subject of the "humanness" of the gods, you wrote that Xenophanes could be saying it's really just that of ourselves and our race collectively looking in the mirror. "When you take all the humanity away from god(s) and make them that totally abstract...I actually agree with some Christian theologians when they say that there is no point in worshiping such a cold and distant deity." -I agree too. But you seem to have taken no notice of my reverse speculation ... namely, that God has created us in his image: we, the design, reflect the designer. I don't, of course, mean in form, but in our mental/emotional/ intellectual makeup. I won't repeat the arguments I put forward in my post of 24 September at 22.04, except to say that this perspective seems to me to provide a logical basis for the human side of God, although of course it runs counter to the "perfect" image fostered by the main religions. -As regards the "asymptote", it's a term I'm not familiar with, so I'm probably using it wrongly! But the definition "a line that draws increasingly nearer to a curve without ever meeting it" makes for a great image, not just for religions trying to capture God, but for many of our human endeavours ... not least, our attempt to grasp reality through language.