If you were blind.....

[LuxFerum]

If you were blind,
would you believe that there is a giant flying rock in the sky burning, and another one that doesnt burn?

[Upchurch]

It's an interesting question. On the one hand, you can feel the heat from the sun, so there is at least some supporting evidence that it exists, even though it certainly wouldn't be conclusive. Further, I would suppose the length of the days and months must be based on something rather than being completely arbitrary.

I guess I'm not sure because I don't know necessarily what conclusions I would be able to reach from that viewpoint.

[Graham]

Unless we're going to personally do scientific reasearch on absolutely everything, we're all taking thing on faith to an extent.

Granted, a seeing person has more evidence that the sun and moon exist than a blind person but how many of us have actually taken the time to check?

Graham

[Bluegill]

I voted "no" because if I were blind I would believe that the earth orbits a "mass of incandescent gas/a gigantic nuclear furnace/where oxygen converts into helium/at a temperature of millions of degrees," or something like that. Not a giant flaming rock.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Bluegill
Not a giant flaming rock. heh. oops. Here I was, taking it as a metaphore.

[LuxFerum]

Originally posted by Bluegill
I voted "no" because if I were blind I would believe that the earth orbits a "mass of incandescent gas/a gigantic nuclear furnace/where oxygen converts into helium/at a temperature of millions of degrees," or something like that. Not a giant flaming rock.
its almost the same thing.:D

[Dragonrock]

If every person on earth were colorblind would you believe light had different frequencies?

During the infancy of the human race, before the scientific method then people wouldn't believe or understand that some creatures could detect the frequency of light.

Why are certain birds attracted to certain flowers but not others even though they all appear to be the same?

What an incredible discovery would it be when some scientist discovers that birds have cone-shaped receptors in their eyes that react to the frequency of light and some flowers only reflect certain frequencies. People would laugh it this new discovery but soon it would become accepted.

If we couldn't see the sky above us then it would take time to figure out about the sun and the moon, but it would happen. People would laugh it this new discovery but soon it would become accepted.


Editted to add: Okay, you have us all admitting that things exist whether we can see them or not. Now are you planning to say that god could exist, we're just not able to see him?

[Bluegill]

Originally posted by Dragonrock
If every person on earth were colorblind would you believe light had different frequencies?

During the infancy of the human race, before the scientific method then people wouldn't believe or understand that some creatures could detect the frequency of light.

Why are certain birds attracted to certain flowers but not others even though they all appear to be the same?

What an incredible discovery would it be when some scientist discovers that birds have cone-shaped receptors in their eyes that react to the frequency of light and some flowers only reflect certain frequencies. People would laugh it this new discovery but soon it would become accepted.

If we couldn't see the sky above us then it would take time to figure out about the sun and the moon, but it would happen. People would laugh it this new discovery but soon it would become accepted.


Editted to add: Okay, you have us all admitting that things exist whether we can see them or not. Now are you planning to say that god could exist, we're just not able to see him?


Yeah, it all depends on whether it's possible to observe, and repeat the observations. If I couldn't rely on other people to tell me what was going on, and I was blind, and I couldn't feel the warmth of the sun, then I would have no basis for postulating the sun's existence. And yet the sun would still exist! I'd be an Asolarist: I'd admit the sun might exist, but I'd also maintain that there was no reason to believe in its existence. Just like Santa.

edited to change "it's" to "its"...the sun got in my eyes.

[ceo_esq]

Originally posted by LuxFerum
If you were blind,
would you believe that there is a giant flying rock in the sky burning, and another one that doesnt burn?
Hard to say. How many blind people believe this?

[Walter Wayne]

Yes, it would explain temperature differences, and I'm sure many brail books refer to the sun.

Walt

[Yahzi]

Originally posted by Graham
Unless we're going to personally do scientific reasearch on absolutely everything, we're all taking thing on faith to an extent.
Graham
Incorrect. This sentence used the word "faith" in a way that is incompatible with the religous sense of the word "faith."

Scientific faith - belief in something that you could test, if you wanted to.

Religious faith - belief in something that cannot in principle be tested.

Accepting somebody else's word on how their work turned out is entirely different than accepting somebody else's word on work that cannot be performed.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Yahzi

Scientific faith - belief in something that you could test, if you wanted to.

Religious faith - belief in something that cannot in principle be tested.
That's an interesting distinction. In college, we refered to "Scientific faith" above as a "conditional assumption". That is, a conditional assumption is something that we assume to be true in the short term so that we can move forward, but always with the understanding that the assumption could still be shown to be false.

[LuxFerum]

Originally posted by Dragonrock

Editted to add: Okay, you have us all admitting that things exist whether we can see them or not. Now are you planning to say that god could exist, we're just not able to see him?

hahahahaha
:D löl
not even close.

The fact is: I was arguing with a friend of mine,
and then he said something like this.
-I cant prove that the god exist, but I can prove that some stupid concepts of god do not exist.
Then I came up with the idea of a Sun god, like one of the Egypt gods.
He cant prove that it isnt a god.

Then I thought
-If this god is visible, and people doest believe in it as a god,
why they believe in a invisible god?

Then I come up with this poll to see if someone have a better idea
of making the sun, you know, just a sun.

[Bluegill]

Originally posted by LuxFerum


hahahahaha
:D löl
not even close.

The fact is: I was arguing with a friend of mine,
and then he said something like this.
-I cant prove that the god exist, but I can prove that some stupid concepts of god do not exist.
Then I came up with the idea of a Sun god, like one of the Egypt gods.
He cant prove that it isnt a god.

Then I thought
-If this god is visible, and people doest believe in it as a god,
why they believe in a invisible god?

Then I come up with this poll to see if someone have a better idea
of making the sun, you know, just a sun.


You are right--it is difficult or impossible to prove that the sun is not some sort of god, especially when you don't define god. What if you define "god" as "the earth's biggest provider of light and energy" or "The biggest object in our solar system"? Both are compelling characteristics of godliness, perhaps.

But if someone is making the claim that the sun is a god, they must follow one of two courses. Either 1) state that they believe that the sun is a god, even though they don't really have evidence of it, and admit that no one else has a reason to be convinced, or 2) state the characteristics of god and show evidence that the sun has those characteristics.

In either case, the I don't think it's the responsibility of someone else to demonstrate that the sun is not a god.


edited to add: Someone saying that they can prove that the sun is not a god is putting themselves in a silly position.

[BillyTK]

It's useful to note that there's few completely blind people about(typical the result of a congenital condition); most blind people have had some experience of sight because their condition is either degenerative or the result of trauma, so they would have some visual knowledge of the sun and moon.

But visual knowledge isn't enough, because neither the sun nor the moon fly across the sky, despite the way they appear to get smaller, the higher up they get. So I'd have to say no, because it's more rational to not believe in giant flying rocks than accept giant flying rock explanation. And like my (registered) blind friend said, "If your sight's so good, why didn't you see that thing you tripped over?" :D

[Graham]

Originally posted by Yahzi

Incorrect. This sentence used the word "faith" in a way that is incompatible with the religous sense of the word "faith."

Scientific faith - belief in something that you could test, if you wanted to.

Religious faith - belief in something that cannot in principle be tested.

Accepting somebody else's word on how their work turned out is entirely different than accepting somebody else's word on work that cannot be performed.

Perhaps another word would have been more correct for the context. However, I believe technically I am correct.

The first definition of faith at dictionary.com is "Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing" which describes the acceptance of accepted scientific principles/facts perfectly, IMO.

You are correct that the use of faith in this context is inconsistent with its religious meaning, however, I was not using it in that sense.

Graham

[Dancing David]

It's faith either way, taking anything as gieven is faith. scientific faith just rests on the ideas that it could be tested.

That is why so much 'reseach' is bogus, people can take it on faith until it isn't replicated.