On 10/21/2010 9:05 PM, Neeum Zawan wrote:
> Patrick Elliott<sel### [at] npgcablecom>  writes:
>
>> On 10/21/2010 12:38 AM, scott wrote:
>> But, just for the sake of argument. Would someone asking them to build
>> something that conflicts with their belief be considered "having an
>> effect on their work"? Or is refusing to work (or the category I named
>> previously, which is "refusing to look at things that conflict"),
>> somehow not the same thing? I think they are. Though, the nature of that
>> problem is **far** more obvious when you consider the sort of,
>> "conscientious objector refuses to give X person Y medicine, even though
>> they are the only pharmacy for 200 miles that carries it."
>>
>> Engineers are less likely to run into such situations, admittedly, but
>> they instead have a very bad habit of showing up in someone "else's"
>> work shop, to tell them that their expertise as an engineer **backs**
>> their religion, which in turn undermines the other guys entire
>> discipline. A problem that wouldn't be so annoying, except that, as I
>> stated in the other post, sometimes you can't *make* progress in other
>> disciplines without referencing things in others, and.. well.. What
>> happens when you consult an engineer on something in biology, and the
>> engineer does 100% perfect work in engineering, but rejects the
>> underlying principles *of* the biology they are being asked to lend
>> their own expertise on?
>
> Hard lesson learned from years in grad school: Data>  logic any day.
>
> And to quote Sherlock Holmes:
>
> "It is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the
> evidence. It biases the judgment."
>
> So I ask you: Do you have actual statistics on what you speak of?
>
> 1. How many pharmacists refused to provide a drug (hard to call it
> medicine - it's not a disease being treated, if I think I know what
> you're talking about) on religious grounds? And of those, what
> percentage of the cases did not have another pharmacist at the same
> site, or within a reasonable driving distance? And of those, how many
> were not reprimanded or lose their job (at least in the US)?
>
> 2. What percentage of religious engineers claim their expertise backs
> their belief in religion, and of those, what percentage of those events
> have been demonstrated to be damaging due to their beliefs?
>
> 3. What percentage of religious engineers/scientists, when being asked
> to apply their expertise on a problem involving biology, have had their
> work on that project been subpar compared to, say, an atheist engineer?
>
> Until you present such data, what you keep stating is without merit.
>
Specific statistics no. Just news reports, done by people that may have 
them. But, in case #1, this is irrelevant. It hardly matters if its only 
one person effected, by one pharmacist, in one town, which by shear 
chance happens to have only the one pharmacist they can go to, without 
driving for 3 hours (which, maybe, they can't do). You shouldn't take a 
job, if you can't, or worse, won't, do the job.

2. - I would say, among those that deny evolution at the same time, 
pretty much 100%. I can't say for those that do not deny basic sciences.

3. Unknown. But, again, the issue isn't necessarily, despite your 
ignoring that point, whether they are religious, but whether their 
religion happens to specifically come into conflict with the subject 
they are being asked about. That is why I say I find it implausible. 
*Something* is bound to conflict, at some point, and when it does, why 
wouldn't the result be sub-par?

-- 
void main () {

     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message