Tusko writes:
It seems self-evident to me that a scientific methodology is preferable, but I prefer it only because I have matured in a very specific kind of environment, and made very specific decisions. I could just as easily be asking WWJD.
The reason that some of us specifically decided that scientific methodology should be the bedrock of our choices of what to believe in is because it quite honestly makes the most sense. The reason why other of us chose WWJD is because we decided to put all of our chips on Christ and because of this move we developed a Christo-centric worldview.
This type of worldview is conservative by definition since it accepts a central belief as a fact and then attempts to correlate all knowledge to be in support of this belief.
Many Liberals tend to think and view change as an evolution of progress.
Many Conservatives tend to believe and view change as an enemy of belief.
Conservatives (Of the religious ilk) tend to believe first and reluctantly think later.
Liberals tend to think and form their world according to the best research and then reluctantly
believe later.... and only if they feel a need to embrace a definite conclusion.
In other words, a believer by definition has embraced a definite conclusion. (The rubber meets the road if they are honest enough to admit that the conclusion is a belief and not a fact.)
A scientist/skeptic/truth-seeker by definition has embraced no conclusions...only the Gospel Of Inquiry.
(Thats my jabberwocky for this morning!
)
Edited by Phat, : edit jabberwocky