4 ms·

I can't help but think you're proving his point. The question he posed was "What important truth do very few people agree with you on?" and the relevant quote p

by rabbyte 12y ago

I can't help but think you're proving his point. The question he posed was "What important truth do very few people agree with you on?" and the relevant quote preceding the reference to God is this: > The reason it is hard to answer in the interview context is that the correct answer is one that the person asking the question is unlikely to agree with. The question is personal. There's no wrong way to answer it yet we proceed as though there are only a few right answers. How does that happen? Well, what might happen if I were to give an answer that sounded like a creationists answer? You might be disappointed, associate my thinking with Kary Mullis, and call into question my intelligence as a whole. Conformity in this case gives me a more favorable option as I can answer your question in a way that has a high probability of being well received at the expense of an honest existence. Thoughts?

stickfigure 12y ago
Some questions do only have a few right answers. I'm perfectly willing to grant him climate change - climate is very complicated and despite present scientific consensus, it is very possible that future discoveries will turn our understanding of the subject upside down. On the other hand, the theory of natural selection is firmly established by evidence (by experiment, even!) and any future corrections will come as Einstein's relativity came to Newton's mechanics - refinement not invalidation. To believe otherwise puts you on the same rational footing as HIV denialists, 9/11 truthers, birthers, and alien abductees. It's not enough to be an iconoclast, you need to be an iconoclast with good critical thinking skills.
- rabbyte 12y ago
  The contentious bit for me is that it's convenient for you to grant him climate change because your understanding of that issue is in close proximity to his understanding. Breaking conformity would require a willingness to hear out ideas that make you uncomfortable as well. Beyond that I totally agree with you.
  - stickfigure 12y ago
    This really has nothing to do with me or anything subjective to me. In objective terms, the theory of anthropogenic global warming is significantly less well established than the theory of natural selection. This is not to say that climate change theories are not strong, but natural selection is almost as firmly established as Newton's law of gravitation. Anyone with a microscope and a petri dish can demonstrate it. Crazy ideas do not make me uncomfortable. Crazy people make me uncomfortable because you never know when god/the prophet/the voices/etc are going to say "kill all the green eyed ones".

by rabbyte 12y ago

stickfigure 12y ago

Some questions do only have a few right answers. I'm perfectly willing to grant him climate change - climate is very complicated and despite present scientific consensus, it is very possible that future discoveries will turn our understanding of the subject upside down. On the other hand, the theory of natural selection is firmly established by evidence (by experiment, even!) and any future corrections will come as Einstein's relativity came to Newton's mechanics - refinement not invalidation. To believe otherwise puts you on the same rational footing as HIV denialists, 9/11 truthers, birthers, and alien abductees. It's not enough to be an iconoclast, you need to be an iconoclast with good critical thinking skills.

rabbyte 12y ago
The contentious bit for me is that it's convenient for you to grant him climate change because your understanding of that issue is in close proximity to his understanding. Breaking conformity would require a willingness to hear out ideas that make you uncomfortable as well. Beyond that I totally agree with you.
- stickfigure 12y ago
  This really has nothing to do with me or anything subjective to me. In objective terms, the theory of anthropogenic global warming is significantly less well established than the theory of natural selection. This is not to say that climate change theories are not strong, but natural selection is almost as firmly established as Newton's law of gravitation. Anyone with a microscope and a petri dish can demonstrate it. Crazy ideas do not make me uncomfortable. Crazy people make me uncomfortable because you never know when god/the prophet/the voices/etc are going to say "kill all the green eyed ones".