Louis
Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006
|
| Quote (carlsonjok @ Sep. 25 2008,14:03) | | Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Sep. 25 2008,07:32) | | Quote (blipey @ Sep. 24 2008,22:41) | | Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 24 2008,22:26) | | Please note there is clearly no reference to gods in that sentence. A higher power can mean virtually anything from aliens to a variety of non-natural explanations for life. |
|
If you really believe that can you give, say, 5 examples of non-natural explanations for life? |
While I've been generally ignoring the FTK infinite do-loop, I do check in every once in a while. This is the operative question highlighted above. All the other stuff thrown at FTK is a mere sideshow. While it is likely futile, I'd suggest a moratorium on responding to FTK until such time as she answers this question or admits that she can't. Although, I'd be impressed if she could actually name one non-natural explanation for life that doesn't invoke God (or god). |
I'm going to agree and disagree.
I agree that this is a very good question that hits at the heart of the matter, and I agree that a moratorium on responding to FTK is a good idea (if only to prevent the circus sideshow that we all enjoy so much).
I disagree that in FTK's specific case this is the best question to focus on initially.
I'll elaborate (shock horror):
FTK's problem isn't scientific, she isn't a scientist and is demonstrably clueless about even very basic science. Asking her for evidence for her claims is almost pointless, it doesn't exist and she wouldn't recognise it if it did. Trying to get her to appreciate the consillient whole of the vast swathes of evidence in support of any specific scientific idea, let alone one as far ranging and complex as evolutionary biology or abiogenesis, is an exercise in futility. I'm not saying she can't get there, I'm saying she isn't there yet. That's a big difference, and hopefully one even FTK can parse sufficiently well to realise it isn't an insult.
FTK's problem is to do with identity politics and to a lesser extent basic epistemology. She clearly doesn't understand how things get known, and she's clearly been fed a line about "evil atheists/materialists/darwinists/whatever" and bought it hook, line and sinker. Asking her questions about evidence and even relaying details on simple pieces of science might be fantastic fun for the lurkers and us, but it misses the origin of FTK's problem from the outset.
Fractal wrongness is the key here. At every level FTK's claims and opinions on science are examined they are (almost all) demonstrably in error, i.e. in direct conflict with the available evidence. Starting at the upper levels of this fractally wrong picture is not going to help. Ok so I know fractals are practically infinite, and this analogy therefore breaks down, but if we can get her to understand the very basics, the other stuff will come (hopefully). That takes work, patience and a bit of restraint on all our parts and I'm only good at one of those!
I explicitly do not mean "FTK has to have a materialist world view" or "FTK has to become an atheist", those are irrelevant misunderstandings of what I mean. I'll use Wesley as an example again (sorry Wes, I realise it's potentially an invidious comparison): he is a self identifying christian, as is FTK. Though their branches of christianity differ wildly, as do their opinions of teleology in nature, Wes and I would find little/no material difference in our approaches to science, evolutionary biology, abiogenesis etc. FTK and I would. I'm one of those EEEEEEEVIIIIILLLLL atheists after all. There is no reason for any of this to impact on her identity or on her general faith (although I grant specific elements will obviously be challenged, if not destroyed) in any detrimental manner.
I think the trick with FTK is to not only convince her that, to our best approximations, there is a real world out there (for want of a better term) but that we can understand it independently of mere subjectivity (there's a lot of philosophical wrangling to be done there, but let's allow this simplification to pass). More than that, that we HAVE understood a lot of it to a very accurate degree.
I'm going to make another potentially invidious comparison that will likely get me shot. Over on Lou's Biology 111 thread we've started to delve into chemical bonding and the nature of the atom. Lou currently doesn't know/understand this stuff I think it's fair to say (and there is no universe in which I mean that in a derogatory fashion). There is no reason whatsoever to expect that he WON'T understand this stuff, quite the reverse in fact, there's a lot of reasons to expect that he will. I've done Lou no favours by jumping in at a reasonably technical level in my comments, he's still at point A and I'm at point C, we need to get through point B to make the A to C link. Lou's a smart bloke, he'll probably do B without any input from me or anyone else, but the link needs to be made somewhere by someone.
With respect to science, especially the science relevant to complex biology, FTK isn't even at point A, she's at point negative Z and we're all out at point Z to the power of Z. Dealing with her concerns out there just annoys everyone! She can't deal with it, she has no basis with which to understand it, it is outside of her experience. We need to make the links, and I'm including FTK in that "we". Now perhaps she'll make them herself, but based on her words here and elsewhere she's been fed too much disinformation for that to happen easily. Seeing the wood for the trees is tough in that position. I see no good reason why she cannot make those links, although unfortunately I can see a huge swathe of very bad reasons. If we can make those links with FTK (not for her) then perhaps she can learn on her own time to fill in the gaps herself. Again, none of this requires or demands and "conversion" or "change of identity" or even a "change of opinion".
That's why, if FTK's amenable, I reckon she should get the hell out of the culture war/identity politics aspect and start from scratch almost. Sure it's tough, and sure it'll take some work, but she'll be better off for it at the end. I reckon that for her to have a productive discussion it's worth her doing it with one or two people who are prepared to lead her through the basics carefully and put up with a few tantrums along the way. Sorry FTK if that metaphor insults you, it's not meant to.
I'm not volunteering by the way!
As things stand FTK just gets to keep making a fool of herself which, whilst hilarious and brilliant for mocking, isn't very nice or useful for anyone. Baiting her to ever greater heights of foolishness does make our point that creationism is merely nonsense quite well, but it doesn't help her or us in the long term. If we fail to change the model we have for interacting with FTK, we are doomed to repeat the old model.
I suppose it depends what we want. To help FTK educate herself or to mock her until he explodes and gets banned or something. I'm not saying those goals are necessarily mutually exclusive either! ;-)
Louis
--------------
Bye.
|
