Originally posted by RJHinds
I missed the humor. It is a good video to show how both many religious and
non-religious people think and react. The narrator seems to dismiss his
arrogance in thinking he knows the full truth by seeming to place himself
in the middle of the extremes. I think it is a mixture of truths and lies but
I am only human and only God knows for sure.
I didn't think it funny, so you're not the only one.
It seemed quite serious, and well thought out and presented, to me.
He isn't claiming to know the full truth, or the absolute truth, nobody can.
On the topic of arrogance....
I was once in a conversation with a builder doing some work on the house (having just made him tea).
The topic got to climate change (man made) and he said he thought it very arrogant that people
thought that we could effect something as big as the planet and climate.
The idea that Humans actions could have such a great effect on the world was arrogant and claiming
we were special.
I didn't say this at the time as I wasn't about to get into a big argument with a guy working on my house.
But I thought it arrogant to think that no matter what we humans did it wouldn't have any consequences
and that we could do what we liked forever with no repercussion.
Particularly given the science that says that the very composition of the atmosphere that he was claiming
we couldn't effect was made in the main by bacteria and basic single celled organisms.
If they could effect the atmosphere and climate surely we could.
And given he was a builder, and not a climate scientist, was it not arrogant to assume that he knew better
than the almost the entire field of relevant experts?
Actually neither position need be arrogant.
Science has good solid evidentiary and theoretical reasons for concluding the climate is shifting, and that
our activity is to blame.
This evidence and conclusion has been subject to huge scrutiny and attack and has only gotten stronger.
So agreeing with this position can't be considered arrogant.
And the claims my builder were making were based in his lack of understanding fuelled by deeply inaccurate
and confusing reporting, which often inaccurately portrayed both sides as being equal.
It wasn't necessarily being arrogant in those circs to hold the position he did (and still does)
Arrogant is a term often thrown at people who belong to an opposing camp in theology.
I suspect that a lot of it comes from the misconception that one side must be arrogant, and as it couldn't be
the side that "I"
( being the person doing the misconceiving )
am on it must be the other side that is arrogant.
In actual fact while either side may be arrogant, neither side need be, they might both be in the middle ground.