Posted by Secular solo man on June 20, 1999 at 09:03:44:
In Reply to: No Doubt? posted by Simple Wiseman on June 12, 1999 at 15:13:41:
As I have defended earlier, one should use objective methods for establishing knowledge claims as far as possible and that one should only accept beliefs if they have been properly justified by reason and evidence. This means that our beliefs should be based on the best possible evidence and that the grounds for them should be adequate . In regard to the bible, one could deny it's reliability because it does not meet the demands of objectivity or adequacey.
If, however, some time in the future evidence somehow shows the contrary, I will, after scrutinizing the evidence, change my mind. What puzzles me is that you continue to believe in the bible's reliability when the evidence for this assertion is lacking. Maybe it's you who has stubborn resistance. As the philosopher W. K. Clifford states in "The ethics of belief" (1877) , `It is wrong always, everywhere , and for any one to believe anything upon insufficent evidence.'
The worst thing about beliefs throughout history and especially this century is that people have not evaluated or scrutinized them. This has resulted in many follk blindly accepting ideaologies, religious cults and other beliefs with fatal consequences. Nazism, marxism,and various forms of fundamentalism for example have resulted in the deaths of literally millions.
Apart from reading the bible have you perused works by Russell, Dewey, Voltaire, Hume, Einstein and Sartre? The bible maybe an interesting book but it certainly is not the only book.
Post a Followup