That is not a justification, that is simply ignoring the problem. AZeitung presents an interesting perspective, and if religious folks present me with a similarly constructed argument on how that could possibly necessitate the nature of their god, I would be extremely satisfied. While I may still disagree, it is a point of contention that follows logical reasoning. The argument you presented to me is simply ignoring the question or problem, and as such I not find it only childish, but should be ridiculed. Everything must be questioned and scrutinized. Ignoring so is simply an appeal to emotion or an unconscious yearning to feel spiritually fulfilled or enrich their lives with meaning. I scoff at those who choose to BELIEVE OR DISBELIEVE without having analyzed and scrutinized their own positions. If you did not arrive at your conclusions through logical rationalizations, then your conclusions are not sound. To me, it doesn't matter WHAT you believe. What matters is WHY and your REASONS for why.
It's absolutely not ignoring the problem. It's living with the "problem" -- it's living in a real world accepting that world as it is experienced by the group. It's real life, not delusion. You're assuming that there is no other way of knowing things, and by doing that you have closed the door to other things. That's sad. I don't scoff at that attitude. I pity that attitude.
Or.... it's NOT a denial of other ways of knowing, rather it's wanting to know what these 'other ways' are, before accepting them. Out of interest, what are these other ways of knowing things? I'd like to know. Thanks.
