RE: virus: Faith and intuition

Vicki Rosenzweig (rosenzweig@NY.hq.acm.org)
Thu, 18 Apr 1996 15:07:00 -0700 (PDT)

Someone who doesn't sign his/her messages suggests that
"feel sincerely, live authentically" would be a good substitute
for the idea of rationality and critical thinking. At a minimum, that's
a very different approach. Sincerity is not enough: there are
people who sincerely believe that everyone who doesn't attend
their church, or mosque, or other religious institution is evil.
And I have no idea of what "live authentically" means: I suspect
it requires a lengthy discussion of psychological theory as
background.

I would also note that I can know things I don't understand
intellectually: sense data are valid even if we don't have a
theory to explain them (or most sense data are: it's worth
knowing what sleep deprivation does to the human brain,
for example).

Vicki Rosenzweig
rosenzweig@acm.org
----------
From: owner-virus
To: virus
Subject: virus: Faith and intuition
Date: Thursday, April 18, 1996 12:29PM

Love it-

Some constructive critisism: The only thing that strikes me as a bit off
is FAITH as one of the three sins. Without it we are limited to only what
we can comprehend intellectualy- and the universe is of course vastly
greater than that.

Perhaps "blind" faith comes closer to what you mean.

I am simply of the opinion that Faith and Reason are intrinsicly
interwoven and go hand in hand with each other. To juxtapose them as
opposites is dangerous.

Is reason to be valued over intuition?

Could "Think critically, act rationally" just as well be "Feel sincerely,
live authentically"?

Great sight, good thinking. I will visit again.