quote:
Unevidenced claims is what we are comparing.
Answering the question would require you to specify the claims that you are talking about. Is there any good reason why you didn't do that ?
quote:
Is dismissing something like miracles irrational to do because at the moment there is insufficiant evidence to suggest they may occur?
Is dismissing string theory at the moment irrational because there is insufficiant evidence to suggest that it is the answer to the universe?
Dismissing specific miracle claims with very weak evidence (at best) seems to be rational. Dismissing a promising theory just because it has yet to accumulate sufficient evidence for acceptance does not seem to be rational.
quote:
Unevidenced ones based on insufficiant evidence.
And those beliefs are ?
Quite frankly it seems to me that rejecting the stories of miraculous milk-drinking cow statues of some years back is quite different from rejecting String Theory. But you seem to think otherwise. Want to say why ? Or maybe accept that it is a good idea to clarify what you are talking about, instead of evading the question?
quote:
I don't believe it's irrational to investigate miracles when other unevidenced claims are also being investigated.
That really depends on what you mean by unevidenced, and the cost and the likelihood of an investigation producing useful results (positive or negative) is an obvious factor, too. For instance it would be a waste of time and money to mount a full scale expedition to investigate Ron Wyatt's claims of chariot wheels in the Gulf of Aqaba.
However, and this is the really important point - INVESTIGATION IS NOT BELIEF. So that is just a side issue....
Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
