From: jimc@cobabe.b11.ingr.com (Jim Cobabe)
Subject: Re: Christian Bashing
Reply-To: jimc@cobabe.b11.ingr.com
Organization: Intergraph 
Distribution: hsv
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 19:05:37 GMT

In article <wiley.702582659@crooks>, wiley@crooks.b11.ingr.com (Dave Wiley) writes:
|> > I would suggest that the only way to argue with someone who is dogmatic
|> > about using "logic" is to demonstrate how illogical and unreasonable
|> > things are in the real world.  There are just too many aspects of life
|> > that are totally illogical for any intelligent person to believe that
|> > they can depend entirely upon logical thinking.
|> 
|> Examples?

You need me to cite examples?  Look around.  Don't you work at Intergraph?  :-)

What I was thinking about here is that there are a large number of fundamental
assumptions upon which logical arguments are based.  We assume that physical
laws will remain constant.  We assume that certain phenomena upon which we
depend will continue to occur as they have in the past.  Yet we have no logical basis
other than our own brief experiences for believing in these things.  We label this
set of assumptions "common sense", or something like that, and seldom worry
about them.

Beyond the thin shell of protection afforded us by "logic" and "common sense"
lies a vast universe of unknown ground.  We cannot deal logically with such
things because logical arguments require factual data as a basis.

We also experience emotions and feelings that are far outside the influence of
logic.  What is logical about the aesthetics of art, music, etc.?  We enjoy these
things because they evoke certain feelings within us, not because they are
logical.

|> Well, anyway.  This may be a good tool for persuading the logical person
|> that not everything can be boiled down to syllogisms, but I hardly think
|> it will tip him/her to your point of view on any given topic.

I was thinking primarily of certain people who are as dogmatic and inflexible
about their "logic" as a "fundie" is about religion.  Both types do not wish to be
"confused with the facts" because they have already made up their minds.
I am aquainted with people of this inclination.  I may even be one of them,
at  least in some ways.  ;-)

|> Any discussion that proceeds without use of logic or at least common sense
|> seems doomed to futility:
|> 
|> "You should live your life according to the teachings of the bible,
|> a book that was divinely inspired by the one true god."
|> 
|> 	"Explain it to me."
|> 
|> "I can't explain it, you have to feel it."
|> 
|> 	"I don't feel it."
|> 
|> [End of discussion.]
|> 
|> Or...
|> 
|> "I can't explain it, you have to feel it."
|> 
|> 	"Oh, yes.  I feel it now."
|> 
|> [Prolonged session of mutual admiration...]
|> 
|> Either way, it's not very interesting.

Or...

"Something is missing in my life."

	"Oh?  Just what is your problem?"

"One of the things I need is to feel a sense of well-being and security."

	"That is not logical."

"Oh....  Umm.... okay, thanks, I feel much better now."

[End of discussion.]

*****************************************************************
| Jim Cobabe                   |  uunet!ingr!b11!cobabe!jimc    |
| Software Consultant          |  jimc@cobabe.b11.ingr.com      |
| System Utilities Group       |  Just My Own Bigoted Opinions  |
| Mail Stop: CR1104            |  phone: (205) 730-5625         |
| Intergraph Corporation       |    fax: (205) 730-6011         |
| Huntsville, AL  35894-0001   |                                |
*****************************************************************
Newsgroups: hsv.religion