Dear Ingrid,

Glad you liked the article. I admire Mr. Harris' boldness to state what
many of us believe is right, but who are too courteous to reveal. I was
always taught to agree to disagree when it comes to matters of faith.
And I've been on both sides of the fence: in my adolescent years, a
missionary-minded evangelical; and in my adulthood, a happy-go-lucky
rationalist. My family, though, is still very fundamentalist Christian,
and both my folks are pastors of a Bible-preaching chapel. So, you can
imagine the interesting discussions we have about religion and truth over
the years. Oh, yes, they do certainly believe we are in the end times and
that Jesus is coming back soon for the ultimate judgment day. In my
darker moments, I've seriously wondered whether I was actually adopted,
because, gee, how could I share the same genes with those who so firmly
believe what I regard as utter nonsense? At the same time, both my
parents are quite intelligent, well-educated (my pop holds two earned
doctorates), and many in their church are also quite distinguished and
respected in their fields of endeavor, which include science, technology,
medicine, and business. So, there's no question in my mind that a person
can be quite sane, intelligent, and rational, yet firmly hold on to
matters of faith.

Why do we believe the things we do? And why are we so sensitive regarding
our beliefs? For example, I've been holding an interesting discussion in
the adjacent Feng Shui (FS) forum, trying to understand the basis of a
practitioner's beliefs in it. I've learned a lot from the discussion, and
I've noticed an interesting progression in the discussion:

1. First, they refer to scientific "proof" that FS works, appealing to the
notions of energy/Qi, using the example of electricity, offering evidence
in demonstrations of EEG tests and applied kinesiology (arm strength
test), invoking celestial influences such as the lunar effect.

2. Then, I try to correct and clarify each of their misuses and
misunderstandings of what science really says on these matters one by one.
(Actually, the bulk of the discussion is me defending the scientific
method!)

3. Next, the nature of their arguments become anti-science: well, the more
you try to prove something, the more you can't; you can't trust
researchers because they make the data say anything they want it to say;
modern science has not yet caught up to FS; FS simply works, and we should
stop wasting our time and energy trying to convince you, because you are
an energy vampire enslaved to science and all you want to do is
antagonize, not learn.

Sigh ...

The best point they have raised is that FS is a faith-based system which
requires no burden of proof to doubters. From the outset, that is exactly
what I proposed: FS's power arises from the belief of the practitioner, nothing
else.

Such sensitivity exists in matters as benign as FS! Dare I start
challenging someone (respectfully, of course) on matters of more eternal
consequence: Heaven, hell, salvation, morality, meaning and purpose in
life?

Why do we believe the things we do? And what is our responsibility as
rational people living in a supposedly enlightened age regarding irrational
belief systems which have no objective basis? There is clearly a very
real power in such beliefs, whether "right" or "wrong," and even
physicians routinely employ the placebo effect to facilitate genuine
healing.

Yes, I look forward to reading Mr. Harris' book and to our continued
discussion about the issues he raises.

HF