Not Knowing the Answer?

I’ve never understood in general why it seems so bad to not know the answer. What I mean is that for those of faith they generally believe that their “book” has all the answers when in reality it does not; it has teachings but no answers. I see so many different versions and views on the same piece of scripture and because it is the way that it is written people must come up with an answer, it seems that they can not go without one. This also applies to other theories such as creation of life, other life in the universe. This is one of the things that appeals to me about science is that it strives to answer questions and it has no problems with saying that “We don’t know”, we have a theory on how it happens but we are not sure. Your thoughts or have I totally confused everyone.

Lack of faith. They have to have answers, and they have to be right, because they do not have the faith needed to be comfortable with what they believe.

I can see why some things you would need the answers too such as how to get to Heaven and all but things like the creation of the universe and life. I feel that you can have faith but simply say that you don’t know how it was done. You have Christian Evolutionist and others believe that we are only a few thousand years old.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
I can see why some things you would need the answers too such as how to get to Heaven and all but things like the creation of the universe and life. I feel that you can have faith but simply say that you don’t know how it was done. You have Christian Evolutionist and others believe that we are only a few thousand years old.

I agree with you, but if you have weak faith, then the smallest disagreement or unanswered question can hurt.

It's true that the "We don't know" answer seems to be used less than it should. Religious dogmatists are quick to attribute everything we don't know to god (the well-known "God of the Gaps" philosophy). And those opposed to such methods feel pressed to offer irrefutable facts rather than admitting we don't know for certain.

The logic is flawed, of course, but it is intuitively pleasing and comforting to those of religious or supernatural faith. So it is easy to see why it happens.

I see it a lot in the field of consciousness, where even cutting edge scientists in the field can't come to a consensus, though numerous credible theories exist, but none have been proven beyond a reasonable chance. Therefore, dualists (those that believe consciousness is separate from material reality) enjoy ascribing such a phenomenon to either a deity or to supernatural causes, rather than either seeing material causes as a possibility, or simply saying "we don't know."

Although I would prefer more certainty about things, I have no particular problem with IDK because, in its own way, IDK is an answer. Or to put it another way, perhaps the final certainty is mystery (even from an empirical-scientific POV, since, ultimately, all we know are our perceptions, though they have--so far--proven reliable, if not necessarily valid). Mystery is the square one from which I've constructed my own personal reality map.

I feel like framing it as Mindship does sort of undermines our ability to know the world around us via empirical data. It is technically true, so I won't refute it on factual principle, only in delivery and interpretation. Subjective reality is a convenient hiding spot for "mystery" or paranormalists, but since (as MS stated) all evidence points to the reliability of observed data and the scientific method, my feeling is that we can approximate reality to such a fine degree that the fact that it remains technically subjective becomes a moot point. It is such a small asterisk next to a reliably accurate approximation of reality that it can be effectively ignored so that we can pursue knowledge. Therefore, reality and observation remains falsifiable, as all good science must be, but is treated like a hard fact until evidence shows us otherwise.

I'd like to see the person that knows-it-all take a step forward and teach us. The Christians (including relatives of mine) say that the Bible is a guide for spirituality. Rarely do I hear them say it answers everything.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I'd like to see the person that knows-it-all take a step forward and teach us.

I'd rather not...too much effort.

313

But seriously, who would that be? You'll have a billion different answers to this question depending on who you ask.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
I’ve never understood in general why it seems so bad to not know the answer. What I mean is that for those of faith they generally believe that their “book” has all the answers when in reality it does not; it has teachings but no answers. I see so many different versions and views on the same piece of scripture and because it is the way that it is written people must come up with an answer, it seems that they can not go without one. This also applies to other theories such as creation of life, other life in the universe. This is one of the things that appeals to me about science is that it strives to answer questions and it has no problems with saying that “We don’t know”, we have a theory on how it happens but we are not sure. Your thoughts or have I totally confused everyone.

It's so bad not to know because then you can't form a religion and profit from the faith of other human beings.

As for science, it often says "we don't know". That's why science can easily dismiss claims by the overly-religious that science is just another form of religion. Or that rabid atheists are just replacing their desire to believe in god with their effort to keep others from believing in him too.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
I feel like framing it as Mindship does sort of undermines our ability to know the world around us via empirical data. It is technically true, so I won't refute it on factual principle, only in delivery and interpretation. Subjective reality is a convenient hiding spot for "mystery" or paranormalists, but since (as MS stated) all evidence points to the reliability of observed data and the scientific method, my feeling is that we can approximate reality to such a fine degree that the fact that it remains technically subjective becomes a moot point. It is such a small asterisk next to a reliably accurate approximation of reality that it can be effectively ignored so that we can pursue knowledge. Therefore, reality and observation remains falsifiable, as all good science must be, but is treated like a hard fact until evidence shows us otherwise.

Though I understand the sentiment, it is not my intention at all to undermine the demonstrable power of empirical science (that would be highly illogical and unrealistic). My only point is: if one is going for as close to certainty as possible, then one should not neglect the "far corner" of the emprical map, even if it's just acknowledged, nothing more (at least for the moment). I see it less as a convenient hiding spot and more as a reminder to keep us on our toes and not get too comfy with our own machinations.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I'd like to see the person that knows-it-all take a step forward and teach us.

I think that most people have an inherent feeling that we shouldn't just be told the answer.

Through out history the idea that anyone with all the answers is unable to share them for one reason or another is recurrent. In SciFi most god-like aliens have a policy against giving information to less evolved species. Zen Koans are meant to lead a person to the answer rather than provide it. Mythic prophets are usually either cryptic (Delphi) or ignored (Cassandra).

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
The Christians (including relatives of mine) say that the Bible is a guide for spirituality. Rarely do I hear them say it answers everything.

B-but isn't Christianity a monolithic conspiracy against free thought?

Originally posted by Mindship
Though I understand the sentiment, it is not my intention at all to undermine the demonstrable power of empirical science (that would be highly illogical and unrealistic). My only point is: if one is going for as close to certainty as possible, then one should not neglect the "far corner" of the emprical map, even if it's just acknowledged, nothing more (at least for the moment). I see it less as a convenient hiding spot and more as a reminder to keep us on our toes and not get too comfy with our own machinations.

Fair enough. You have a healthy outlook on subjectivity. My reaction to it is a bit hostile due to the fact that I've seen it used as the "hiding spot" I mentioned, where the person then invokes faith as the only way to know truth and is impervious (in their mind, at least) to any reasonable arguments against them.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I'd like to see the person that knows-it-all take a step forward and teach us. The Christians (including relatives of mine) say that the Bible is a guide for spirituality. Rarely do I hear them say it answers everything.

Clearly you didn't watch teh Hugh Ross video.

😛

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Clearly you didn't watch teh Hugh Ross video.

😛

Originally posted by DigiMark007
...Clearly you didn't watch teh Hugh Ross video.

😛

No one did, because if they had, they would have asked Jesus to be their savor before it was over. Only really evil people could withstand the full hour.

Oh, wait... you saw the video; didn't you? 😛

Originally posted by Da Pittman
I’ve never understood in general why it seems so bad to not know the answer. What I mean is that for those of faith they generally believe that their “book” has all the answers when in reality it does not; it has teachings but no answers. I see so many different versions and views on the same piece of scripture and because it is the way that it is written people must come up with an answer, it seems that they can not go without one. This also applies to other theories such as creation of life, other life in the universe. This is one of the things that appeals to me about science is that it strives to answer questions and it has no problems with saying that “We don’t know”, we have a theory on how it happens but we are not sure. Your thoughts or have I totally confused everyone.

Just because you don't know, why does that mean others can't?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Just because you don't know, why does that mean others can't?

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Fair enough. You have a healthy outlook on subjectivity. My reaction to it is a bit hostile due to the fact that I've seen it used as the "hiding spot" I mentioned, where the person then invokes faith as the only way to know truth and is impervious (in their mind, at least) to any reasonable arguments against them.

Oh, absolutely, it gets misused time and time again, and even I often find it hard to have patience with someone who just plain hides behind the "apron of faith." At the very least, I would appreciate some critical thought as to why that person believes as he/she does.

I used to be like that. "Where is God? Why cant I see him? SHOW me God."

Then I got faith, and my outlook on life has never been the same.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I used to be like that. "Where is God? Why cant I see him? SHOW me God."

Then I got faith, and my outlook on life has never been the same.