Re: But that doesn't make a lot of sense
Submitted by Altima on May 22 2002 17:48:03
In reply to But that doesn't make a lot of sense submitted by A.I. Watcher on May 22 2002 13:52:08
|
Well, to be like Bill Clinton, that would depend on your definition of "know." Yes, one can argue scientific methods of determining and observing what is real or not, like if you can see / hear / smell / taste / feel it. But then how does one scientifically know what great art is, for example. What seperates mere random noise from music? What is the difference between paint splattered on the wall and the Mona Lisa? Perhaps religion is like that, something you know, but have no rational explanation for. Maybe it's not like that for everyone, and I haven't exactly felt any sort of clichéd rush of spiritual enlightenment with religion, but I think that your use of the word "know" may be too specific. As to what Splash was saying, I agree with everyone else. His "truth" is different from "Who invaded Poland in 1939?" truth. Even the most die-hard of fundies will admit that one doesn't need religion to know what 2 + 2 is. It's like Nirvana in Buddism. Would you be as offended if a Buddist told you that you couldn't acheive Nirvana unless you accepted Buddism? |
Follow ups: