I Am Inclined To Think That Nothing

To Put It Bluntly But Fairly, Anyone Today Who Doubts That The Variety Of Life On This Planet Was Produced By A Process Of Evolution Is Simply Ignorant — Inexcusably Ignorant, In A World Where Three Out Of Four People Have Learned To Read And Write.

Virtually Every Major Technological Advance In The History Of The Human Species- Back To The Invention Of Stone Tools And The Domestication Of Fire Has Been Ethically Ambiguous. If You Want To Reason About Faith, And Offer A Reasoned (and Reason Responsive) Defense Of Faith As An Extra Category Of Belief Worthy Of Special Consideration, I'm Eager To Play. I Certainly Grant The Existence Of The Phenomenon Of Faith; What I Want To See Is A Reasoned Ground For Taking Faith Seriously As A Way Of Getting To The Truth , And Not, Say, Just As A Way People Comfort Themselves And Each Other

Cults And Prophets Proclaiming The Imminent End Of The World Have Been With Us For Several Millennia, And It Has Been Another Sour Sort Of Fun To Ridicule Them The Morning After, When They Discover That Their Calculations Were A Little Off. But, Just As With Marxists, There Are Some Among Them Who Are Working Hard To "hasten The Inevitable," Not Merely Anticipating The End Days With Joy In Their Hearts, But Taking Political Action To Bring About The Conditions They Think Are The Prerequisites For That Occasion.

Up Till Now, We Can Suppose, Nervous Systems Solved The 'now What Do I Do?' Problem By A Relatively Simple Balancing Act Between A Strictly Limited Repertoire Of Actions - If Not The Famous Four F's (fight, Flee, Feed, Or Mate), Then A Modest Elaboration Of Them.

The Theoretical Fruits Of Deliberate Oversimplification Through Idealization Are Not To Be Denied... Reality In All Its Messy Particularity Is Too Complicated To Theorize About, Taken Straight. The Issue Is, Rather (since Every Idealization Is A Strategic Choice), Which Idealizations Might Really Shed Some Light... Which Will Just Land Us... Diverting Fairy Tales.