In "The Mind of God," Paul Davies said "Many beliefs [of men] are no doubt inate"?

Question

as a result of "evolutionary factors." This appeared in the first paragraph.

>When such statements of mysticism begin a thesis, HOW CAN YOU ACCEPT the remaining thesis without doubt about its logical validity?<

Answer 1

You can&#039;t unless he explains the evolutionary factors that would make it  &quot;no doubt&quot; innate. If he just uses a broad stroke rather than pointing out the details, it makes no sense and isn&#039;t worth your time.

Answer 2

I would agree with Maxben except for one thing: even if the author tried to describe what he meant, the mysticism would still remain until he proved he was not being mystical, that he had a scientific basis for his argument.

But in the mean time you would looking over his shoulder all the time trying to discern the mistakes in his logic that would render his &quot;science&quot; invalid, sending it back into mysticism.

You would not be free to just go along with his argument, without examining it for it&#039;s flaws.

Whenever ANY author makes a statement of mysticism as fact, I either take 10 giant steps back, or I just close the book and find something else if I&#039;m not in the mood to debunk his &quot;it&#039;s not mystic, it&#039;s science&quot; frame of logic.

If it isn&#039;t mystic, don&#039;t speak in mystic terminology to begin with.