Re: [asa] The God hypothesis- a test

Merv said: We apparently want to know instead "how many others think so?".
  In some cases or stations of life, if somebody wants to actually learn
something, their own peers should be the last resort. Instead they/we flock
to the polls.

I respond: As with the "scientific consensus" on various topics? I don't
know, Merv. We're social beings, not disembodied Platonic / Cartesian
minds. The postmodern critique of the neutral individual observer who can
objectively assess any truth claim, IMHO, holds lots of validity. Whether
its science, scripture, law or politics, no one really stands above our
outside the text.

On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 10:49 AM, <mrb22667@kansas.net> wrote:

> Quoting philtill@aol.com:
> > He showed overwhelmingly
> > that these studies prove religious people to be happier than irreligious
> > people.
> ..
> > Now the Bible says Christians will suffer in this world, "in this world
> you
> > will have tribulation, but I will give you peace." That sounds like a
> > testable and proven claim.
> >
> > Phil
> >
>
> McGrath sites studies showing religious people (including Christians) are
> happier in general.
>
> Bible says Christians will suffer.
>
> I'm not disagreeing with either of those statements, but atheists (who like
> many
> fundamentalists who specialize in non-nuanced views of things) would have
> fun
> with that.
>
> For Christians it raises interesting questions: so are the presumably
> "happy"
> Christians not genuine? Or perhaps --more likely, "happy" and "suffering"
> are
> vague enough terms as to not be mutually exclusive. And even more likely
> yet,
> there is probably no way a survey or study could meaningfully capture
> statistically accurate data on how "happy" various groups are. If I had to
> answer a survey on whether I am happy or not, either answer would be a lie
> because my true state simply can't be represented in that binary fashion,
> unless we carefully define what "happy" is. And definitions run afoul of
> simply
> predetermining the results.
>
> Another question: if it's "all religious people" that are in general
> happier,
> then that would put Christianity in the company of all religions whether
> true or
> false. So what would that show anyway?
>
> Joy may be a slightly deeper (or as yet unpolluted) term than "happy". But
> whatever word is used I don't foresee statisticians ever being able to
> compile
> meaningful data on it that could be taken seriously as evidence.
>
> Thank God for his Word. I personally grow exasperated with the
> post-modernist
> flavors our news programs increasingly have. These days it seems to count
> as
> "news" what most people are thinking or favoring in the polls. Never mind,
> for
> example, what a presidential candidate actually thinks on a real issue. We
> are
> instead informed how popular or unpopular he/she is. Or never mind whether
> something is true or accurate and what real evidence comes to bear on it.
> We
> apparently want to know instead "how many others think so?". In some
> cases or
> stations of life, if somebody wants to actually learn something, their own
> peers
> should be the last resort. Instead they/we flock to the polls.
>
> --Merv
>
>
> --Merv
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

-- 
David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.