A Greek philosopher and polymath, a student of Plato and teacher of Alexander the Great.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. – Aristotle
I think that in that quote lies a key difference between an atheist and a theist.
Theists like Christians and Muslims are actively deterred from entertaining any kind of thought that might contradict what they believe. This is accomplished by having an all-seeing, all-knowing overseer who can and will convict and punish you for thought crime. The punishment of eternal torture and a flawless prosecutor who knows everything you think is a fantastic deterrent to entertaining thoughts that might lead to doubt.
Not being willing or able to rationally evaluate an opposing thought – like a religious claim – from the perspective of another person, is a very blunt way to avoid changing your own mind.
Entertaining thoughts that might contradict what you already believe is a cornerstone of science – scientists actively search for thoughts that might contradict established theories, even – sometimes especially – their own.
The ability to entertain a thought and examine it from multiple perspectives without necessarily accepting the premise of the thought is a mark of an educated mind and a mature philosophy because it demonstrates a lack of fear for new ideas, a solid understanding of – and trust in – your own position and it implies a willingness to change your mind. Conversely, actively avoiding entertaining opposing thoughts demonstrates a fear of those thoughts and implies an unwillingness to adapt to new ideas.
Posted something similar on a blog run by a fundie.
Christians must not contradict the bible.
Rule One: The bible is always right.
Rule Two: If they see or research something that contradicts the bible, refer to Rule One.
Yea, I know that mentality. What amuses me to no end is how they try to apply that mentality to the Bible that contradicts it’s self. It’s one thing to deny external evidence of idiocy, it’s another thing entirely to pretend that contradictions in the actual document in question don’t exist.
I’ve been on Bob’s blog for a while now. He’s not one of those types that censor though he regularly just refuses to engage. Once in a blue moon he will surprise me and concede a minor point. Tildeb (from Questionable Motives) and I have been tag-teaming with him for a while now.
(Oh, and as an aside, I think you may have put your recent comment in the wrong section. It looks like you were critizing Tildeb as opposed to Bob and his blog.)
Please check out some of the earlier posts by Bob. It’s a rich mine of derp.
Ah, yea, I see my comment is in the wrong place.