[Phys-L] Re: [SPAM-4.611] Re: THE WEDGE STRATEGY of The ID Movement

[hhaskell at MINDSPRING.COM (Hugh Haskell)]

At 09:38  -0500 10/14/05, Tom Wayburn wrote:
> On the other hand, you have to have faith in science.  You must have
> unshakeable faith that the laws of physics will not change appreciably
> between Akron and Toledo nor between Tuesday and Thursday - moreover that
> they remain the same regardless of who is testing them.

One can call it "faith," but it is at best a stringently qualified
faith. It is tested often--every time I travel from Akron to Toledo
and back, and every week as I navigate the time coordinate from
Tuesday to Thursday. Furthermore, it is a faith that is subject to
revision in the presence of contrary evidence. If the laws of physics
suddenly started varying with time or location; if we discovered
phenomena in distant stars that were not consistent with the
fundamentals of the physics we use to describe star structure; if it
became clear that gravity on earth was different from gravity in
outer space, then that "faith" in science would have to be modified
to accommodate the new information.

In other words, my "faith" in science is a testable proposition. If
the evidence shows that the world is not a relatively orderly,
predictable place, then I am prepared to abandon my "faith."

On the other hand, religious faith as seems to be the case today,
requires that one ignore evidence that contradicts the tenets of your
faith, or to claim that, even if it is wrong, we need to believe in
order to keep order in society. Neither of these approaches to the
world seem to me to be very consistent with science.

Hugh
--

Hugh Haskell
<mailto:haskell@ncssm.edu>
<mailto:hhaskell@mindspring.com>

(919) 467-7610

Never ask someone what computer they use. If they use a Mac, they
will tell you. If not, why embarrass them?
                        --Douglas Adams
******************************************************