Dr Skinner wrote:
> I can't resist... the argument goes as follows I think:
>
> So then I say: So I want to believe in the teapot round Pluto so I will and
> that's ok because you can't prove it doesn't exist. Isn't that ridiculous?
Isn't the argument more like...
I believe in the teapot round Pluto. I think there is some evidence for
it, believing in it and living by its principals will bring no harm (and
will likely bring good) and no-one has disproved its existence.
ie.
a)Removing the 'want' from your statement - belief is often not a matter of
'want'.
b)Adding that there is _some_ evidence (that level of evidence is open to
debate). I have seen the unexplainable good happen.
Jel
|