mentalgymnast wrote:What ever reality IS isn't dependent on what one person thinks vs. another. They may be right, they may be wrong...or somewhere in between. Whatever IS...IS. If someone's views in regards to how science works is flawed, that doesn't change the nature of whatever "truth" is in the religious vein. So to point out that someone's scientific views may be flawed doesn't mean that the same person's religious views are in turn necessarily false.
Pretty simple really.
I didn't read the whole thread and I might be missing something though...
Regards,
MG
That's funny. I don't know if you did this on purpose, but you just described something called Bad Faith within the context of existentialism. You, in fact, could probably be a pretty decent example of the fact that you're aware you're kidding yourself on whatever level regarding Mormonism, but you act the part of a Mormon regardless.
Regardless, your staying (or doing nothing) within the context of Mormonism is a rejection of freedom, but you're still responsible for that choice. Nothing you do, no matter how much you compartmentalize objective reality, unburdens you of the choice you made to do nothing.
To Barney Level this for someone like Ceeboo, you're fakin' the funk, but choose not do anything about it because you've convinced yourself there isn't a better alternative (seeking to relieve yourself of the responsibility of freedom of choice), but you know better and that's why you post here.
You can't absolve yourself from freedom because you've decided to be a moral relativist. It's simply acting in bad faith with your nature. Good stuff, really...
- Doc
PS- An apple is an apple no matter how anyone looks at it (science); but claiming someone calling it a peach (religion) is just as valid (moral relativism) is absurd. Throwing in with the religionists at this point is Bad Faith because you know better, and will never change that apple into a peach.