Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Ground Rules
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3238 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 16 of 68 (513632)
06-30-2009 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Hyroglyphx
06-30-2009 8:28 AM


Prior to their landing on Plymouth Rock, there had already been a Puritan revolution in England where in fact they were persecuted by the Church of England. Quakers assemblies were abolished and punishable by torture and/or imprisonment.
True, but the Puritans didn't come here from England. They left England and went to live with the Dutch, who were much more tolerant of religious groups. The Puritans thought they'd be fine, but they noticed their children playing with kids who didn't believe like they did and became concerned they were being "tainted" and so set out for the new world with the intent of starting their own country that would be a Puritan one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Hyroglyphx, posted 06-30-2009 8:28 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Richard Townsend, posted 06-30-2009 2:48 PM Perdition has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3238 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 19 of 68 (513645)
06-30-2009 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Richard Townsend
06-30-2009 2:48 PM


My private hypothesis, with no evidence, is that the strength of American conservatism is related to this strong puritan heritage. We simply don't have the same thing over here in the UK.
I've been assering that (with equal lack of objective evidence) for a long time. America, as a country, has an unbelievable preoccupation with sex, "morality", and militarism in the face of conflicting viewpoints, all of which is paralleled with the Puritan mindset.
Re ground rules, the possibility of error is assumed among scientists, but it is not assumed by non-scientists and they tend to interpret scientific statements as definitely true('scientifically proven'). So I think when debating with non-scientists this assumption needs to be made explicit.
Again, I agree. When a sicentist is speaking to a colleague, they will often assume the other person knows there is a tentativity, and will probably only mention it when speaking in terms of a margin of error of X percent. When speaking to a lay audience, this is one of the facts about science that needs to be hammered home and repeated until it sinks in. People who read pop-sci magazines and websites, or who view Discovery Channel specials as "gospel" truth do science a disservice when they see next year's special and notice it says something different and decide that scientists don't know what they're talking about. It's like people who criticize the weatherman for getting the forecast wrong...they just don't understand what a forecast is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Richard Townsend, posted 06-30-2009 2:48 PM Richard Townsend has not replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3238 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 28 of 68 (513776)
07-01-2009 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by InGodITrust
07-01-2009 2:39 PM


However, when science points to something with 99.9% accuracy, will pointing out that minor possibility of error do anything but confuse people as to how sure scientists are?
Should they have a sign that says, "Don't let your children on the other side of this fence bcause there is a 99.9% chance that your child will fall, though we're not entire sure."?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by InGodITrust, posted 07-01-2009 2:39 PM InGodITrust has not replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3238 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 38 of 68 (513941)
07-02-2009 3:44 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by petrophysics1
07-02-2009 3:12 PM


Re: Come to Jesus, Garlic Breath
Someone telling you something is evidence. The thing is, is it enough evidence to believe the claim at hand? If it's a mundane thing that won't change much in the grand scheme of your life and the person telling you is trustworthy, then sure, go ahead and trust the person. When it comes to the big things, like a god, that will inevitably change your life in some significant way, it takes just a little more than someone saying "Trust me."
Make sure you tell onifre he is foolish to run his life on the BELIEF those daughters are his.
I'm fairly sure he has evidence. Did he have sex with the mother approximately 9 months before the child was born? Did the mother agree that the child is his? Does the mother have a history of being honest on such things? Do the children look like him in any way?
He's got all kinds of evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by petrophysics1, posted 07-02-2009 3:12 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024