Posted: Mar 16, 2016 3:05 pm
blue triangle wrote:I would argue however that such knowledge can be discussed in an intellectual way, as long as all parties understand that such experiences are normally highly personal and difficult, perhaps impossible, to validate in any scientific way. The believer should accept that personal experiences, even in large number, do not constitute evidence for the truth of any religion or even the reality of the supernatural. The skeptic should accept that there are some areas of personal experience that may currently be outside the purview of science. That could be the starting point for an intellectual discussion of the highest quality.
IOW, the skeptics should start by conceding that the believers are correct. Then we can all have a discussion on whether the believers might be correct.
I see a slight problem with that plan. And "highest quality" would not be the adjectives I would expect to describe the ensuing discussion.