What you say doesn't seem off-the-wall to me at all. I've believed a lot
of weird things in my life, your assertions don't strike me as
off-the-wall, just incorrect and sloppy.
><<A particular issue taken on faith may or may not contradict scientific
>evidence, that was not the point. The point was that faith and the
>scientific method are polar opposites.>>
>
>I'm glad to see you share my faith in the scientific method.
>
I made a comment about word definitions, you responded as though I made a
value judgement about science. Please try to respond to what I say, not to
a convenient irrelevant straw-man.
><<[RB] How do we know that the scientific method works? It sure seems to...
>>I mean I certainly have faith in it.
>>
>
>I answered that before... all that is necessary is the power of
>observation.>>
>
>Just like observation makes it "obvious" to Creationists that the universe
>was designed by a Creator?
>
No, the difference is that there is no proof of creationism, but the space
shuttle *is* proof that science works, and it's observable.
><<Are you saying that you don't see a difference between anecdotes and
>measurable differences (e.g. differences in life expectancy in the last 200
>years because of medical science)?>>
>
>Whoa! Let's play "find the hidden presuppositions" in that last question.
>You are assuming:
>
>1. That some figures you have read about differences in life expectancy over
>the last 200 years are accurate.
>2. That medical science is responsible for such differences.
>
>The first you are taking on faith. The second is a guess, one not even
>shared by many experts if I remember correctly (I think sanitation gets the
>nod for greatest influence in prolonged life).
OK, I cited a bad example. The point still stands though.
>
><<If you're shooting arrows at a hypothesis, you are *not* taking a
>faith-based position about it. Faith does not come into play until you
>decide to accept it without evidence. Sorry to split hairs, but you're
>throwing around the F-word inappropriately.>>
>
>Here I am shooting arrows at YOUR faith-based positions and you can say
>that? I don't know how else to reach you.
>
I don't know either, but please keep trying to reach me. My life is in
shambles without your wisdom. :)
><<I'm not talking about emulating the personal lives of miserable people.
>My
>point was that there are a lot of miserable people out there who are also
>brilliant and creative. To discount their genius because they are unhappy
>seems like the height of prejudice. It's also not in our best interest.>>
>
>I admit I am prejudiced against misery. And do you have any scientific
>evidence to support your contention or is this another faith-based position
>on your part?
>
I believe the positive assertion was yours, that happiness is the standard
by which we should judge the works of others. The burden of proof is
therefore on you.