The Nature of this Conflict (Humans)

by George Jelliss , Crewe, Thursday, January 21, 2010, 11:45 (5228 days ago) @ xeno6696

xeno wrote: "... each individual human being gets to determine what they qualify as important. To some people, internal consistency and reproducibility simply are not important. Empiricism isn't important. If those things aren't important to a person, guess what--you, myself, Dawkins--no one on earth--can do anything about that, because in order to come in line with your view or Dawkins' view, those things must be important. Dawkins can call it a delusion till he's blue in the face, but it isn't going to change anything."-Well obviously, if someone is determined to be irrational then arguing rationally with them is not going to get very far. But why do they choose to be irrational? Why would anyone choose to be irrational? Most things we do in life have to be based on rational empirical judgments. Otherwise we would get run down crossing the road because we ignore the traffic, or we would be bankrupted because we can't add up our shopping bills, or we would end up in jail because we can't appreciate the need for laws.-Personal or traditional fantasies about the universe being run by some supermind, existing before human life appeared, based on no reproducible evidence, are irrational, but need not be harmful unless they start to impinge on our understanding of reality. Believing it may not have practical adverse consequences, unless it be that those who do not conform to it are persecuted, which is unfortunately exactly what is happening in many parts of the world.

--
GPJ