is 'believing (against the evidence) that God is good' is a very good psychological protection mechanism from despair?

[Wootah]

Hi all,

It occurred to me that when everything is going badly in life that 'believing (against the evidence) that God is good' is a very good psychological protection mechanism from despair and nihilism.

Without believing in a good God, there is really no reason to believe that life should not be the way it is.

Does anyone want to give some reasons for or against this?

[Wootah]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #60]

Science always changes its mind is one thing but it also would be nice if it apologised as well.

I have recently realised that the science and changes its mind is the perfect cover for never being responsible.

[brunumb]

Science always changes its mind is one thing but it also would be nice if it apologised as well.

Is this old furphy still doing the rounds? Please enlighten us on all these changes of mind and how they have impacted on the progress science has nevertheless made.

[Wootah]

Science always changes its mind is one thing but it also would be nice if it apologised as well.

Is this old furphy still doing the rounds? Please enlighten us on all these changes of mind and how they have impacted on the progress science has nevertheless made.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconvers ... ully-75818

Just google a little.

[Tcg]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #60]

Science always changes its mind is one thing but it also would be nice if it apologised as well.

Apologize for refining truth down to finer details? What an odd request.


Tcg

[Wootah]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #60]

Science always changes its mind is one thing but it also would be nice if it apologised as well.

Apologize for refining truth down to finer details? What an odd request.


Tcg

Do you think the doctors that did not wash their hands, if they could speak, apologise for not doing so?

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/hist ... cal-advice

Or do you think they would be justified to say well that is what we knew at the time?

--

You know, 'the science always changes its mind' attitude is the perfect foil for doing what we want and not having to apologise later. I never saw through that until this thread.

[brunumb]

Science always changes its mind is one thing but it also would be nice if it apologised as well.

Is this old furphy still doing the rounds? Please enlighten us on all these changes of mind and how they have impacted on the progress science has nevertheless made.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconvers ... ully-75818

Oh dear. Is that the best you've got? Please explain how that is science changing it's mind as distinct from science progressing on the basis of new and better information.

[benchwarmer]

You know, 'the science always changes its mind' attitude is the perfect foil for doing what we want and not having to apologise later. I never saw through that until this thread.

Bolding above mine.

Seriously? Is that what you think good doctors are doing? I won't argue that there are not some bad doctors doing shady/illegal/bad/wrong stuff, but most medical professionals are probably trying to help their patients based on the latest medical science that we have.

I'm not sure exactly what you are expecting here. Are you hoping the next time you go for a physical the doctor apologizes for every ancient medical procedure ever done? This would be like asking a Christian to apologize for every horror that Christians are/have inflicting/inflicted on humanity.

It really does seem to irk some apologists that science progresses while their religions remain set in paper. It must be wildly inconvenient to have the opposite side continually advance and provide observable results, while stuck making up excuses and/or reinterpreting holy texts to attempt to remain relevant.

[TRANSPONDER]

Science always changes its mind is one thing but it also would be nice if it apologised as well.

Is this old furphy still doing the rounds? Please enlighten us on all these changes of mind and how they have impacted on the progress science has nevertheless made.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconvers ... ully-75818

Oh dear. Is that the best you've got? Please explain how that is science changing it's mind as distinct from science progressing on the basis of new and better information.

The 'science is always changing its' mind' meme is a basic wrongheadedness in Creationism (where the meme started) and clearly is getting out to the general public. The counter I use is that of all the scientific discoveries and conclusions, none have been overturned since the Ptolemaic system was turned inside out. The 'changing of mind' is rather finding out more about a subject. New discoveries about the composition of the atom are changing how we think about it but essentially none of that is 'changing its' mind in the (other) sense of 'always getting it wrong'. Religion, on the other hand, is being shown to have got everything wrong but they refuse to admit it. The creationist meme shows a fundamentally flawed mindset as distinct from the scientific always willing to accept new evidence that requires changing the mind. Religion is about sticking to the dogma, denying the evidence and only slowly and quietly changing so as not to be left behind, hoping nobody will notice.

[Wootah]

To all the people replying please note that I don't think I opened this line of discussion in the thread Transponder did in post 60.

However, I never think we realised what was the purpose of the statement, ' the science changes its mind' really was until we brought it to the light.

This really feels like a: 'The Flak Only Gets Heavy When You’re Over the Target' moment.

[TRANSPONDER]

To all the people replying please note that I don't think I opened this line of discussion in the thread Transponder did in post 60.

However, I never think we realised what was the purpose of the statement, ' the science changes its mind' really was until we brought it to the light.

This really feels like a: 'The Flak Only Gets Heavy When You’re Over the Target' moment.

dI hope that I misunderstood and that wasn't the 'Well I sure rattled your bars!" rejoinder to a rebuttal. Of course if some did get a bit impatient it may be understandable when 'science always changing its' mind' has been so often explained as its' strength, and Religious Dogma's refusal to shift even in the face of compelling evidence is its' weakness. Science admits when it is wrong and deals with new evidence; religion doesn't, but quietly shifts its' views, so as not to be left behind.

And yet Science has not had to change any science basic since the Geocentric system was replaced by the Heliocentric back in the 16th century. Newton's laws still apply. Relativity still applies. Evolution still applies.

Have a great weekend everyone