Readers occasionally challenge me on my supposed rejection of all things spiritual and faith-driven because I advocate rational thinking and the study of statistics and probability. In fact, quite the opposite is true, and that paradox sometimes takes some time to get across. Rational thought does not supercede the need for a belief system. In fact, rational thought teaches that we cannot answer all the questions of interest to human beings from first principles. We can even engage in nasty arguments over just what constitutes first principles and even what constitutes rational thought.
Given that we cannot rationally derive answers to all the questions that bother us, the conclusion is that we must decide to take some things on faith. But here is where I differ with my religionist friends. I believe those things that we take on faith must be both self-consistent and constantly challenged.
One can easily imagine a living code which does not require either standard. In fact, most codes of conduct address the self-consistency issue by insisting that true believers accept both sides of contradictory statements if they come from a “revealed” source. The ability to overcome common sense and believe in highly unlikely events is often considered a virtue. As to challenging core beliefs, the memes behind all organized religions look to protect themselves and propagate by preventing questioning of the underlying tenets. The means used for this protection can be serious.
About this point in a casual discussion with a well-meaning friend who is a religionist, the traditional defensive rebuttal to rationality is to say something like, “Well, the things that you talk about are just another form of religion. Your decision theory and fancy mathematics is no more justified than my belief in… (fill in the blank). If you find yourself in this position, I suggest thinking long and hard before answering. Your colleague might not be discussing, but is simply intent on conversion or self-convincing. If that is the case, you are both better off by responding something like, “If that is what you believe, then who am I to question? How about them Padres?” With luck, you can preserve your friendship and learn something about baseball.
On the other hand, if your friend is truly engaged, then you might point out the gulf that distinguishes science and rational thought from what we normally label “religions.” The two systems occupy different spaces and serves different needs. You can follow this up by also pointing out that many scientists are devout followers of the various sects around the world. Being rational does not preclude being a religionist – it just sets limits.
What it comes to the crunch, the things I write about here are valuable tools that have been developed over thousands of years as people learned how to learn. These tools are different than the tools that preceded them. Mathematically based modeling is highly successful at describing the physical world. Science is self-correcting on a much faster time scale than any correction in organized religions. But utility does mean ultimate truth. I don’t know what ultimate truth is. You could hit me over the head with it and I probably would not recognize it. Decision theory is a tool just as calculus, cell phones, silverware, and automobiles are tools.
And as we saw in the last couple of postings, one can conjure up some fun puzzles and games based on rational thinking. After all, all work and no fun makes for a dull life.
In response to the interest my original tutorial generated, I have completely rewritten and expanded it. Check out the tutorial availability through Lockergnome. The new version is over 100 pages long with chapters that alternate between discussion of the theoretical aspects and puzzles just for the fun of it. Puzzle lovers will be glad to know that I included an answers section that includes discussions as to why the answer is correct and how it was obtained. Most of the material has appeared in these columns, but some is new. Most of the discussions are expanded compared to what they were in the original column format.
[tags]decision theory, statistics, puzzle, science, religion, proof, faith[/tags]