faith doesn’t replace knowledge
So there’s this new movie out about the ridiculousness of religions and faith by Bill Maher. No link love, but he sure gets quite the mainstream media attention. Both rationalists (aka atheists and/or agonostics) and religious folks say there is media bias for the “other” side.
The thing is, everyone has their own explanation for what the things of the world means, and the stuff that our disciplines of learning have not fully exhaustively addressed. And the thing is, they haven’t, and I think that’s why they’re called fields of inquiries.
Here’s my napkin sketch for how the stuff of life and faith fit together: science, money, relationships, tasks, people, nature, things, arts, etc. Or, to use labels of academic disciplines: Fine Arts, Humanities, Social Sciences, Life Sciences, Physical Sciences, Mathematics. [aside: so much faster & easier to draw on paper than to use Photoshop, after wasting 15 minutes trying]
Faith assumptions are the answers we have to the question of things we don’t know concretely. (cf. “What don’t you know and how will you learn it?”) And I think this is a good way to think about it, that faith gives perspective and insights into the rest of the world and how the world of learning is figuring out how all the stuff of the world works. And faith definitely colors how we place value on the stuff of life.
[update] Dan Kimball saw that one Religulous movie and commented at length. Not having seen the movie, what I don’t like is people being ridiculed, even if some people are kinda different.