This is a blog to discuss philosophy, chess, politics,
C. S. Lewis, or whatever it is that I'm in the mood to discuss.
Yes, this was already known since before.http://www.scipie.net/docs/2007/Kelemen_PS_2004.pdfWell, I guess it's only a matter of time before scientists run out of things to check, mythbusters suck nowdays after all.
I note that it is interesting that according to some we live in a godless universe that is random and unguided by any higher power. Yet for some "reason" mindless purposeless reality seems to want to fool us into thinking there is an ultimate purpose?I note that is a strange coincidence indeed.
Zach,"People also naturally believe in pre-Newtonian (not even pre-Einsteinian) physics."Are you referencing the fact that people think that if you are walking holding a ball and they drop the ball, they think that the ball will drop straight down vs. falling parabolically? "I try to focus on legitimate arguments, not appeals to what is popular."Indeed. The human mind is prone to some serious cognitive biases so noting a natural tendency doesn't show that it is somehow reasonable.
I would never suggest that natural beliefs are infallible. What may be significant here is the "default" status that is sometimes claimed on behalf of atheism. Natural beliefs like believing in the external world do not have the burden of proof on them, although I suppose we could reject them with sufficient counterevidence. Is the same true of God?
One of the very best in review of the current research into religious belief and behaviour is HERE.Not only does the article refer to the most recent findings in this research, it outlines the progress that has been made since the early 1990s, prompted in some ways by the advent of IDers and Creationist attempts to ingratiate themselves into the science curriculum in schools. If science was to refute the claims of IDers and creationists it was a responsible course of actions to undertake the hard yards of study to explain why it is the human species has an instinctual predilection to god attribution.It is of no wonder that this Oxford research effort confirms what has already been known but has been worked on over the last twenty years or so.Another excellent piece of research can be obtained from this article at HERE.
Zack and I agree on something for once.Who knew?Anyway to expand on what he added such an interesting coincidence as an allegedly mindless purposeless reality trying to fool us into thinking their is intention and purpose behind our perception of reality does show belief in God isn't mere irrational superstition like belief in the Easter Bunny. Evolutionary explanations for religion merely beg the question especially for those of us who are predisposed toward Thomism and Theistic Evolution.
Post a Comment