I subscribe to the idea that religion is a kind of dangerous but eradicable kind of cultural virus.
If people give in to the temptation of the aesthetic criterion for truth, then Science should not blame itself for the continued existence of Religion. People are not yet strong enough for the “truth”. The problem still remains - some of the worst doxological aesthetes are philosophers. If they are not going to do the persuading, then we shall have to rely on the pathos of religious life outweighing the desire for self delusion in the common man.
Would you judge that the following is a well founded argument?
If a proof for the non-existence of an improbable state of affairs cannot be found, then the probability of the state of affairs must be greater than objective evidence indicates.
If you judge it to be unfounded, then tell me why so many (otherwise intelligent) people believe in GOD?
It would be a worse to believe in something I knew to be false, than to live in a world with no fixed reference points.
There is no good, and no bad There is no white or black or blue. There is no reason to do anything, as there is no reason not to do anything. Therefore I believe in GOD to rectify the problem. Problem is - in rectifying the problem I place my naked aggression at the disposal of people who bid me perform acts that I now have come to think of as BAD.
We face an unpallatable pair of alternatives:
Either - The church is ruled by a degenerate bunch of spineless appeasers. These bastards will tell us anything that we wish to believe in order to keep the church alive and to cling on to the glory of times gone by.
Or - Or the church is ruled by a bunch of scheming villains who have hidden their ferocity in order to ride out the change in society that is occurring in the 20C.
I’m inclined to believe the former.
arguably, statements made in natural language don’t correspond to facts about the world. Dr. C. Boyne
It is the possibility for people to make statements of this kind without real fear of refutation, that enables the sort of specious assertions to be made that bolster the groundless authority of the church.
froth misc philosophy