I think that some of us may forget about the possibility of NOT forming opinions.
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 18:50, Frank Marenghi <frank_maren...@hotmail.com>wrote: > I agree with Mr. Sibley. It would be impossible for each of us to weigh all > of the evidence available on every issue and come up with our own rational > conclusions On those things we know little or nothing, we do NOT really have to have an opinion. I am reminded of a lay friend who told me outright that global warming was not happening (I think she thinks it is a communist plot). I asked her, why do you even HAVE an opinion on this matter, when you know nothing of the subject? After all, if it is, or is not, occurring, it is not a matter of opinion. Just like evolution - not a matter of opinion. So, if the situation is such that I cannot weigh ENOUGH evidence, I don't come to conclusions either. So, if someone asks me what I think of the grand unified theory of physics, I will say, I don't know enough to form a good viewpoint. That is a much freer position, and more logical for a scientist. Read Futuyma's review of the book "What Darwing got wrong" (the review is titled "Two Critics Without a Clue") and you will see what happens when ill-informed people try to make an argument based on insufficient knowledge of a subject. So, as scientists, when we don't know enough about a subject, we should suspend judgement of that subject, or learn more. But, we should definitely NOT feel obliged to have opinions about that of which we know nothing. Religion is often just that - forming opinions on that about which one knows little or nothing. Cheers, JIm
