4 ms·

> It is extremely hard for people who are working on facts based stuff to get their heads wrapped around people who are religious, let alone those who are relig

> It is extremely hard for people who are working on facts based stuff to get their heads wrapped around people who are religious, let alone those who are religious and who are working on facts based stuff at the same time (there are plenty of those). It is also hard for religious people to wrap their heads around facts and certainty. Before I was atheist I would debate Christians on the merits of theistic evolution vs. intelligent design. Intelligent design proponents will literally accuse Christians who believe differently of blasphemy. My mom even lost a science teaching job over something more minor. She was unwilling to say with 100% certainty if the story of creation happened in 7 contiguous days, or may have happened over 7 non-contiguous days. While she believed it was most likely 7 contiguous days she didn’t have enough evidence to be sure.

jacquesm 5y ago
> It is also hard for religious people to wrap their heads around facts and certainty. I know some very good hard science scientists who have absolutely no problem with this and I suspect that goes for the bulk of them. Religious people come from all walks of life and have all kinds of professions, some of them dealing with facts, others less so. I also know plenty of atheists that have a problem with accepting facts and dealing with probability (which is another way of saying certainty). So I don't think that by itself says much. It's when the two are in conflict that things get interesting: what if your facts say 'a' and your belief says 'b'. In some cases this leads to people renouncing their belief, in others it causes psychological issues, and in the majority it is just absorbed without any apparent conflict or discomfort.