(Let’s join a quiz show in progress)
Quiz show host: “What is inside of the black box on the table?”
Preacher: “God.”
Quiz show host: “No, I’m sorry that’s incorrect. There’s nothing inside of the box. See?” (Lifts box and there’s nothing inside)
Quiz show host: “Next question. Who is standing behind the curtain?”
Preacher: “God.”
Quiz show host: “No, I’m sorry that’s incorrect. It’s my wife standing behind there. Come on out honey and show yourself” (loud applause)
Quiz show host: “Final question. What is printed all over my under shorts?”
Preacher: “God.”
Quiz show host: “No, I’m sorry that’s incorrect. The correct answer is little pink flowers. I was in a hurry this morning and I grabbed them out of the wrong drawer. Sorry honey.” (looking at wife)
Quiz show host: “Mr. Preacher. You’ve missed every question on tonight’s show. Why is it that you answered every question with God?”
Preacher: “Because all of my life I’ve been taught that when there is something that’s not known, the answer is always God.”
The moral to this story is that if a person doesn’t know the answer to a question, it’s a lot less embarrassing to say “I don’t know” rather than jump to the conclusion that their favorite God has something to do with it.
In the past, gods have been invoked to explain rainfall, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, physical illness, mental illness, eclipses, the outcome of battles and wars, etc…
This attributing god(s) to the mystery of unknowns is known as worshipping the “God of the gaps” (gaps in understanding).
Of course today we know better and look back with some pity and amusement at people jumping to such conclusions. But ironically people are still making the same mistake with today’s unknowns such as the origins of the universe. To many religious people, the answer is automatically the same as it has been for thousands of years: whatever god or gods they happen to believe in were involved.
As a discipline, scientists have learned to courageously leave a question mark where it belongs. It’s a lot less embarrassing that way.
When it comes down to it, many people use ignorance (often personal) in an attempt to justify their belief in god. To say “how could could something as complex as the eye just evolve?” shows complete ignorance of genetics, comparative zoology, natural selection and a whole lot more. Because we may not have an explanation for something today does not mean god exists. Tomorrow it will be in elementary text books.
Excellent comment Billy.
I think it’s unfortunate that even in the 20/21st century many people including myself are/were still brought up to think that what they choose to “believe” has some kind of validity as far a determining reality, especially concerning what is clearly unknown.
When many people brought up this way begin to pursue an education towards a scientific career, they inevitably at some point have to “unlearn” this approach to life or at least compartmentalize it from their career because it simply doesn’t work.
Just because an explanation for something today is in the textbook, doesn’t mean it’ll last through tomorrow. In the end, don’t you have to put faith in science also? Unless you, on your own verify for certain every single experiment conducted to derive those theories.
No, science isn’t about faith at all. It’s actually the opposite of faith and in fact, science tends to filter out faith which is one of the main reasons science works as well as it does.
Science is about doubt. It’s not the black and white world of faith where something is either true or false, good or evil, etc…
Science is about shades of gray. Models and theories are supported by data and logic to varying degrees. It’s not the all or nothing world of faith. Some concepts are better supported than others.
Unlike faith, a concept in science must always be “falsifiable” which means that it is never unconditionally accepted as “true.” Reasons must be given why a concept could be inaccurate or it’s not accepted as a valid model or theory for consideration in peer review.
Why can’t pple live with ‘doubt’ and ’shades of gray’?? Is it a personality thing? ie.some pple are black and white thinkers?
Dazzler, These so-called shades of gray are just ignorance. And we simply don’t want to live ignorant lives like you do.