clipka wrote:
> "It was the Pixies" is, as such, just as good as an explanation as "it was the
> electric discharge of blah whatever".

Let me know when you get those pixies charging your car battery for you.

> The *true* quality of the explanation is not in what faith it is based upon, but
> in how useful it is to base decisions and actions thereupon. 

Study in contrast: Dark Ages vs Industrial Revolution.

> If the Pixies
> explanation leads me to act the same as the Electric Discharge explanation,
> then there's no difference in quality among those two whatsoever.

That is incorrect.

> Actually, scientific explanaitions seem to be particularly *bad* at giving
> guidance for action, because they're perfectly detached from any moral aspects.

This is incorrect.

In any case, religion isn't any better at providing moral guidance.

> At best it can lead me to try to achieve what *I* think is best, even if those
> thoughts happen to be total rubbish.

And this differs from religion how?  Can we say Salem Witch Trials?

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message