Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles; site uokvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!we13!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!parsec!ctvax!uokvax!emjej
From: emjej@uokvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: More Skepticism of Skeptics - (nf)
Message-ID: <8300053@uokvax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 12-Apr-84 14:24:00 EST
Article-I.D.: uokvax.8300053
Posted: Thu Apr 12 14:24:00 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 17-Apr-84 06:48:31 EST
References: <2195@cbscc.UUCP>
Lines: 36
Nf-ID: #R:cbscc:-219500:uokvax:8300053:000:1779
Nf-From: uokvax!emjej    Apr 12 13:24:00 1984

#R:cbscc:-219500:uokvax:8300053:000:1779
uokvax!emjej    Apr 12 13:24:00 1984

/***** uokvax:net.religion / cbscc!pmd / 12:22 am  Apr  6, 1984 */

>Let me give you an example of non-rational learning.... [Young
>children] are not very developed.  They learn mostly by being told this
>or that is true, false, good, bad, etc.  This is not irrational for the
>child because it doesn't necessarily go against reason, it just goes
>beyond his powers of reason.  With an adult like myself, the reasoning
>is more developed, but I have no trouble accepting the idea that it may
>be flawed or limited and there are truths that must be 'revealed' to
>me.  As in the case with a child and his parent, a personal relationship
>is needed for this kind of learning to be effective.

OK; I certainly acknowledge my limitations (having one's nose rubbed in them
periodically sort of does that to one :->). However, there is nobody around
who is an obvious candidate for virtual parent to my virtual child; only
equally fallible humans making conflicting claims about alleged gods and
revealed truths.

>As far as artistic expression goes, I made that point only to illustrate
>the fact that we accept many things just for what they are, without
>asking whether or not they are "logical".  I don't question whether
>or not it is logical for my wife to like roses better than tulips.

True, nor do we usually bother looking for Freudian explanations or any
others. Theological questions are usually considered differently from
questions of taste (by non-logical positivists, anyway :->), i.e. they
are thought to be propositions with truth values, and many people
devote considerable effort to arguing their truth or falsity. Does your
wife try to convince people that they'll suffer eternal torment if they
don't prefer roses to tulips?
/* ---------- */

						James Jones