As a scientist, I accept that empirical thought provides an effective means for seeking out truth or knowledge by making hypotheses and determining if the weight of the evidence supports or does not support those hypotheses. I work within the framework of this scientific method at work daily and accept that the knowledge I gain and act upon in that setting is dependable.
I believe if I trust that this empirical type of thinking works within the lab that I have no reason to accept that its efficacy dissipates or disappears upon exiting the threshold to that lab. Realizing this, I accept that I should make decisions in my life based on critical analysis of evidence as well. This translates not only to my daily decisions but also my religious decisions.
I accept what I have said above but find it hard to live by in my day to day ritual of life. At what point can I have adequate confidence in my subconscious nature, if you will, to not require the processing of the evidence of every detail in my life. For example, I wake up in the morning and see that I have a pot of coffee waiting ready for me in which to drown my drowsiness. The coffee is there, yes, I see it, but what evidence is there that I should drink it. I mean really. Is there evidence that I shouldn't drink it? Is there evidence for both? Should I care? If I don't care, does this mean that I am saying that I believe moments exist in which my empirical thoughts are not required or carry less value? If so in what does the reasoning of this thesis culminate?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment