All,

Not everyone places more credence, per se, in one being than in any other. It is the *methodology* -- not the methodologist -- that atheists embrace. Sure, we may believe one person's educated opinion over another's, based on his track record, but this does not mean we perfunctorily buy into anything that person says.

Religious folks, even non-religion specific theists, see the ultimate source of knowledge and power as a sentient 'being.' This causes theists, in my opinion, to assume others tend to see a discipline's validity as a function of its practitioneers (i.e, its 'beings'). Therefore, when an atheist cites an example given by another atheist, that atheist is incorrectly criticized for believing he "can only believe what was published by (whomever)."

Carl Sagan was a wonderful author, and many of his works are quoted by folks like me to express a given view. This, however, does not mean that I drop all discretion and automatically "believe what I want to believe" everytime I read Sagan!

-LH

• A dig? - harvey1 - August 30, 2001 - 18:59 UTC
• Or maybe astutely acute? - stormcrow - August 30, 2001 - 19:30 UTC
  • Nah! - harvey1 - August 30, 2001 - 20:29 UTC