Comments on: Evolution vs. Creationism? http://cdonner.com/evolution-vs-creationism.htm Sun, 29 Apr 2012 14:35:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Michael Pardee http://cdonner.com/evolution-vs-creationism.htm/comment-page-1#comment-6348 Michael Pardee Sun, 30 Oct 2011 15:50:14 +0000 http://cdonner.com/christiandonner/evolution-vs-creationism.htm#comment-6348 We tend to have too narrow a view of evolution and of creationism (small "c"). Technically, Buddhists are creationists and atheists. The same is true of Solipsists, whose philosophy is much closer to science than the more conventional Rationalist view. At least Solipsists warn there is not test for an objective reality, something that Rationalism refuses to address. I was a Rationalist in my teens until I realized it was more doctrinaire than nearly any other religion. I was expected to believe in Antarctica based on the accounts of a few thousand observers but not believe in ghosts in spite of the accounts of millions of observers. Today I describe myself as a skeptical solipsist (small "s" because I am not convinced) - the world makes more sense in concept than in analysis. I am a troubleshooter by trade... I am an applied scientist every working day. Science works well for me because I work in an engineered environment. I am very aware that in nature science does not work nearly as well as most people think - it is more an actual guideline - because we never know all the variables and can never even know how many we are missing. Science works pretty well for interpolating but not for extrapolating. The Rationalist view that everything is within our sphere of understanding or is eminently and imminently close to our understanding is the most crippling superstition of our time. We tend to have too narrow a view of evolution and of creationism (small “c”). Technically, Buddhists are creationists and atheists. The same is true of Solipsists, whose philosophy is much closer to science than the more conventional Rationalist view. At least Solipsists warn there is not test for an objective reality, something that Rationalism refuses to address. I was a Rationalist in my teens until I realized it was more doctrinaire than nearly any other religion. I was expected to believe in Antarctica based on the accounts of a few thousand observers but not believe in ghosts in spite of the accounts of millions of observers. Today I describe myself as a skeptical solipsist (small “s” because I am not convinced) – the world makes more sense in concept than in analysis.

I am a troubleshooter by trade… I am an applied scientist every working day. Science works well for me because I work in an engineered environment. I am very aware that in nature science does not work nearly as well as most people think – it is more an actual guideline – because we never know all the variables and can never even know how many we are missing. Science works pretty well for interpolating but not for extrapolating. The Rationalist view that everything is within our sphere of understanding or is eminently and imminently close to our understanding is the most crippling superstition of our time.

]]>