[pi18n]

Well it's like how can certain computer programmers be Christian fundamentalists[1]? They were taught that way as a child and have no influences that really refute what they believe. I thought USA was the bee's knees until I had a chance to interact with citizens of other countries.

[1] I think programmer implies they have critical thinking capabilities, and I think as empiricists we all must reject fundamentalism as a hypothesis.

[christianfn]

I'm a programmer and a Christian fundamentalist.

Do you think because I have a religion that I am a poor empiricist? Or that because I know programming languages in the high double-digits I am a poor believer?

Einstein's 1930 NYT article [1] might serve as common ground for us to discuss this rationally. I have to point out, though, that my faith is not out of "fear, social morality, [or] a cosmic religious feeling." I believe as I do because it is an essential part of who I am (identity).

I actually agree with you that there is plenty of unwarranted, blind nationalism in the USA.

[1] Summary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Albert_Eins...

[enko]

> I believe as I do because it is an essential part of who I am (identity).

Interesting. I do not think I've heard someone put it quite like that before. I find it quite bizarre and circular:

"I believe in X because I define myself as a person who believes in X, and therefore not believing in X means I lose my identity, therefore I believe in X"

So it's literally impossible for you to stop believing in anything, no matter how ridiculous, without losing your entire sense of self. Kind of defined yourself into a corner there, eh?

[ebrenes]

First off, it seems you've made X arbitrary large, when for the OP it seems to have been a carefully defined set of beliefs that are attached to their identity. In other words it does not follow they'll believe literally "anything".

Besides I don't see what would prohibit the OP from changing his identity or evolving it. Unless we've somehow established identity is unchangeable, of which I'm not convinced.

[3amOpsGuy]

>> [they] have no influences that really refute what they believe

>> I believe as I do because it is an essential part of who I am (identity)

You've not left much of a case for pi18n to debate with that statement.

[pi18n]

I don't think you are a poor empiricist in your field. If you can somehow equate fossil records with creationism, then yes you are a poor empiricist in that field. I specifically wrote that it's a kind confirmation bias, however.

[panacea]

What sort of programmer? Are you a computer scientist, or a computer engineer? I sincerely don't mean any offence, but I wonder if there are two ends of the spectrum of code and computer programming. Do you muck about in fractal algorithms or learn how best to utilise the latest protocols and languages for functional requirements?

[christianfn]

I'm more interested in hearing what pi18n has to say, but it's a fair question:

I hold multiple degrees above my BSc in Electrical Engineering, one of which is in Computer Science. I'm also PE certified (US Professional Engineer certification).

So I believe the answer to your question is: yes.

[shadowfox]

Hmm. I am curious as to why you think these two categories would think differently.

[arethuza]

Out of interest, what was the empirical evidence that led you to believe that there is a God?

Is your belief in a God falsifiable?

[mikeash]

> I believe as I do because it is an essential part of who I am (identity).

What an odd reason to believe something. I generally try to only believe things because they're the conclusion that best fits the available evidence. Why would you use any other technique?

[freetibet]

It seems hard to reconcile taking the Bible literally and being an empiricist. Downright impossible if you are a geologist.

[xradionut]

I doubt that he's taking the book literally. It would be hard to follow the old testament to a T. (Maybe he's betting Pascal's Wager or having a spiritual life really does help him get through the rest of this irrational life's crazy times.)

As for geology, it's pretty evident that prophets that wrote the "Truth" millennia in the past probably didn't listen when the voices from on high droned on about plate tectonics and such.

[christianfn]

Just FYI: Genesis 10:25 could be interpreted as a plate-tectonic level event.

http://www.biblica.com/bibles/chapter/?verse=Genesis+10&vers...

[xradionut]

And Jesus could be interpreted as an alien visitor playing a prank on us primates. Works both ways.

[christianfn]

I respect those who believe, for example, that the earth was created in 7*24 = 168 hours.

I don't believe that, however.

The pentateuch's creation story differs enough from how it appears in modern English translations that I have no problem believing it is literally God's word.

[flyinRyan]

If you had removed that first sentence and the footnote, you'd have gotten an upvote (instead of a downvote) from me. This site isn't for your political/religious bashing. And btw, if you're going to talk about such things you should probably look into philosophy.