RE: virus: pale religious lechery

Richard Brodie (
Sun, 7 Mar 1999 22:29:37 -0800

I think there is what Hofstadter would call "level confusion" (not to be confused with Level 3) here. Having a belief in faith is not the same as having faith. Arriving at a decision using reason is not the same as arriving at a decision using faith. For one thing, it takes longer.

Richard Brodie Author, "Virus of the Mind: The New Science of the Meme" Free newsletter! Visit Meme Central at

-----Original Message-----
From: []On Behalf Of David McFadzean
Sent: Sunday, March 7, 1999 8:28 PM
Subject: Re: virus: pale religious lechery

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Brodie <> Date: Sunday, March 07, 1999 7:51 PM

><<What if for every situation where faith is useful, it can be shown that
>would be at least as well off using reason and sometimes better off?
>Wouldn't that be an excellent reason to abandon faith? Of course it would
>take a reasonable person to understand the merit of this argument and
>therein lies the dilemma :-)>>
>OK, I'm waiting for your proof. The trouble is, no such proof is possible.

Say you hold a belief, X, in faith. It is either useful or not. If it is useful, then explaining how and why it is useful is identical to arriving at the same belief X through reasoning. If it is not useful, then no explanation or line of reasoning will show that it is. QED.