More on religion and reasoning

Found some responses over here to an earlier post.  Some randomly chosen comments:

  • “within the constructs of any decent form of logic, and within any reasonable scientific framework, god does not exist and pretending he does is stupid and corrupts that framework.”
  • “On the topic of Leprechauns I’m agnostic.  The true believers of Leprechauns can’t be upset at me, because I still believe it’s *possible* Leprechauns exist. And of course, the a-leprechaunists can’t take issue with me because I don’t *really* believe in them.”
  • “If it is *obviously* false, then it is demonstrably false, and you should have evidence to *prove* it is false. There is no evidence that the earth was created 4,000 years ago. BUT there is plenty of evidence that it was created 4 billion years ago, proving the first assertion to be false.”

I love reading these sorts of debates: more evidence, I reckon, of reasonable individual differences in reasoning!