I Have Shown That Those Who Deplore

The Only Answer To The Endless Chains Of Why, Why, Why Is That The Alternatives Died

Virtually Every Major Technological Advance In The History Of The Human Species- Back To The Invention Of Stone Tools And The Domestication Of Fire Has Been Ethically Ambiguous. If You Want To Reason About Faith, And Offer A Reasoned (and Reason Responsive) Defense Of Faith As An Extra Category Of Belief Worthy Of Special Consideration, I'm Eager To Play. I Certainly Grant The Existence Of The Phenomenon Of Faith; What I Want To See Is A Reasoned Ground For Taking Faith Seriously As A Way Of Getting To The Truth , And Not, Say, Just As A Way People Comfort Themselves And Each Other

Go Ahead And Believe In God , If You Like, But Don't Imagine That You Have Been Given Any Grounds For Such A Belief By Science.

Darwin's Idea Of Natural Selection Makes People Uncomfortable Because It Reverses The Direction Of Tradition.

My Faith In The Expertise Of Physicists Like Richard Feynman, For Instance, Permits Me To Endorse—and, If It Comes To It, Bet Heavily On The Truth Of—a Proposition That I Don't Understand. So Far, My Faith Is Not Unlike Religious Faith, But I Am Not In The Slightest Bit Motivated To Go To My Death Rather Than Recant The Formulas Of Physics. Watch: E Doesn't Equal Mc2, It Doesn't, It Doesn't! I Was Lying, So There!