Con Ok, first round start out with the affirmative opening statement.
There seems to be little doubt that Western civilization has lost the strong faith in God that it had for centuries under Christianity. Indeed, though it is somewhat of a generalization that allows for notable exceptions, it is safe to say that unbelief in God has never been so public in the whole of the history of the West, from its pre-Christian or pagan beginnings in Greece and Rome to today.
There have, of course, always been atheists and agnostics among intellectuals and other people who give little or no thought to the existence of God and who live out their lives as practical materialists, but they have lived and functioned within a society that generally paid homage to a divine reality of some sort.
Today, however, the situation seems to have finally been reversed. The public attitude to religion and belief in God in most modern nations nowadays and particularly in Australia is generally disdainful and at times hostile.
That public stance is not necessarily a true reflection of the popular feeling. This can be, and often is, religious in some way or other.
But in regard to the public profession of faith in God and things religious people generally tend either to be "a silent majority" subdued to some extent by the mockery of the more clever and powerful elements in the modern "democracies", or a silenced majority cowed by the menaces of those in power as is manifest in an extreme form in modern totalitarian regimes.
This state of affairs has not appeared overnight. The study of its genesis would involve a close examination of all aspects of social and religious history in modern times.
This is not possible within the limits of this paper but in order to address our question it is necessary to understand something of this history.
For it is relevant to the test of "reasonableness" that is to be applied. By way of preliminary let us say that part of the difficulty lies in the fact that our attention has been deflected from those aspects of things about us that point to something divine.
We might call it being "form-blind" or "tone-deaf" by analogy with someone who has no natural appreciation of art or music. To demonstrate the beauty of something to someone there needs to be some modicum of a sense of beauty in the observer or listener.
But, the sad fact is that our modern education system tends to destroy the sense of wonder, or the appreciation of the wonderful in nature. This is no accident, and it is connected with the rise to dominance of modern science and technology, which affects strongly the way we look at the world.
For the scientific method is akin to the way children seek to satisfy their curiosity regarding something by first destroying it, i. There is nothing unhealthy in that as such for it is an essential part of the process of learning. But it is only a part and indeed the inferior part of the effort to understand things.
As they come to know more about things children begin to see how all the parts fit together in the whole and develop the integrative side of their minds.
In regard to the study of nature, this other part of our mental makeup constitutes an insight into the unity of the object which in works of art we still call its "form" but in natural objects we struggle to find a word for.
The reason for this is that we have become unaccustomed to pay much attention to this aspect of things, preoccupied as we are with examining the parts down to the minutest detail.
It is rather as if one insisted on examining a painting as close up as possible. For certain purposes this is necessary and valuable, but not for appreciating and enjoying the painting - as a whole.
Even when the scientist looks at the stars in the heavens his interest in them is of a similar nature to the anatomist - to learn what we can by dissecting the object - rather than to the artist - to capture somehow the wonder of the whole.
Immanuel Kant, who was something of an astronomer, was speaking as a philosopher when he said: We have of course not lost the capacity to appreciate and enjoy the beauty of nature.Sep 12, · Is it reasonable to believe I have a hernia?
Since i am having problems with my leg could it be something else? I would like to have more testing, but I would like to find a doctor who will order the correct test. These aspects of reality are of interest to the philosopher (and the artist) rather than to the scientist.
They thus serve to highlight the difference between "reasonable belief in God" as seen by the scientist and the philosopher. The scientist may dismiss any proofs which depend on suchlike evidence. These aspects of reality are of interest to the philosopher (and the artist) rather than to the scientist.
They thus serve to highlight the difference between "reasonable belief in God" as seen by the scientist and the philosopher. The scientist may dismiss any proofs which depend on suchlike evidence. You can find answers that are fascinating, thrilling, reasonable —and based on convincing evidence.
And that is no accident.
^ par. 5 For more information, see the brochure Was Life Created? published by Jehovah’s Witnesses. Transcript When Is It Rational to Believe in Miracles? KEVIN HARRIS: Dr.
Craig, when is it rational to believe in miracles? That is the name of this article that we are checking out.  You have a chapter in your book Reasonable Faith dealing with miracles. The same goes for just about any miracle claim based on testimony, by definition a miracle, in this context, is something virtually impossible.
If it is based on testimony, it is to be compared to something that is perhaps not even rare, humans being mistaken or lying. It will never be reasonable to believe the more unlikely explanation.