TED Conversations

Bilal Saad

United Nation member

This conversation is closed.

Do you believe in something you can't see?

We believe electromagnetic waves exist, but we can't see them.
We see a smile, but we can't see if it is genuine or not,
We believe in the idea of freedom but cannot see it.
What else do you believe in that you cannot see?

Share:
  • thumb
    Oct 22 2011: "One cannot depend on the eyes, when one's imagination is out of focus" Mark Twain
    • thumb
      Oct 22 2011: Good one Craig, and it reminds me of a couple others that I like:>)

      "The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes..."
      (Marcel Proust)

      "Only as high as I reach can I grow,
      Only as far as I seek can I go,
      Only as deep as I look can I see,
      Only as much as I dream can I be..."
      (Karen Ravin)
    • Oct 22 2011: Good point, Craig!
      Albert Einstein: "Imagination is more important than knowledge." He continues with "Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world."
      • thumb
        Oct 25 2011: Hi Natasha, I respect Albert about what he said but tell what if your imagination is fairy tell what about that then it is compare with the knowledge you have got?
  • thumb
    Oct 24 2011: I would throw in Dark Matter and Dark Energy but I will also add that I have great reason for believe in the existence of these things.

    Is this another post that is going to segway into another discussion about religion?
    • thumb
      Oct 25 2011: Hi Orlando, No this post not about religion it's about what do you belief. So what you post about dark matter and dark energy I understand you are belief in things only if you seeing them. By that you are don't belief in love or hate and you belief in human like black and White not like a person.
      • thumb
        Oct 26 2011: Hi Bilal,

        If I understand what your saying correctly I would have to say that from my understanding Dark matter is not seen. There are theories that talks about its existence (such as how stars at the outer most end of the galaxies are moving just as fast those closer to the center of the galaxies). this is perplexing being that if it was only gravity the stars at the outer most end of the galaxies should be orbiting into open space.

        As far as love and hate example I will say we can physically see love and hate (our spouses behaviors, other peoples reactions to one another). If we are just talking about pure emotions that arise out brain states and bio-chemicals I would say no but we are aware of the state of mind that we are in.
  • thumb
    Oct 22 2011: Do you think blind people unable to believe anything .......?
    • thumb
      Oct 22 2011: Hi Salim, the blind people actually they are seeing things we can't seeing them, they are imagination wider than us so they belief with headlines, their belief not changed by Temptation or another thing can change the headline. So they are have a Pure Beliefs.
      • thumb
        Oct 23 2011: Hi Bilal
        Well, blind people use other senses like touching , smelling, hearing etc than who can see. We don't only use our sight to understand something to rely on or believe in (as Ed Schulte expressed)........

        Moreover we use our intelligence , cognition , logics, reasoning etc.... which blind also uses

        I don't get you what you meant by "Pure Beliefs" ?
        • thumb
          Oct 23 2011: Hi Salim, what i meant about "pure beliefs", that their belief not change over time because external variables. when you belief in something at first moment there a variable can change that belief and make you updata your belief it is brain Activity.
    • Oct 23 2011: Hi, Salim and Bilal !
      I've thought about this before, so,I can share my guesses :)
      Blind people "see" with different senses, touch is the most obvious but not the only one, they see with something,which we all have, as a hidden potential. We, who have "working" eyes/ and sure, it's blessing!/ have these senses underdeveloped out of necessity,in "hunter-gather" sense of necessity, but if we want to"see more truly", I believe, it's a prior need.
      And I am sure blind people have believes, because nobody knows the Truth, but maybe some of them are closer, than we are.
      • thumb
        Oct 23 2011: An organism has a limited potential of energy available.
        If the major part is used to the use of our eyes and ears there's little left for other ways to relate with our surroundings or ourselves.

        As one spend some time with little visual and audible stimuli new ways of experience rise as feelings and inner vision that is less restricted as that world which appears for our eyes and ears.

        That's why seers and prophets in the Bible or other scriptures always live in a desert or seclusion or monastery. Shaman’s and wise man mostly separate themselves in nature. Meditation also shuts the world out and creates space to close in and expand our inner world which is the outside world inside out.
        • Oct 23 2011: Hi, Frans! Nice to see you here!
          You've brought a new layer of depth to the conversation I was searching for.
          Only one point I'd like to clarify. Are you sure that the "amount" of potential energy is limited or so limited?
          Maybe " seers and prophets' went to the desert, just not to be distracted, they were searching for concentration and peace,saving energy wasn't their purpose. There is an old saying, "When God created Time he created enough",Maybe the same with energy, maybe we, humans have much more energy that we could possibly imagine,and limit of energy is our invention,what do you think?
          Thank you!
      • thumb
        Oct 23 2011: Thanks Natasha for your thoughts (guesses).
        We who have functional eyes tend to think we see everything but actually how much.....
        A person with functional eyes can be blinder than a person without functional eyes...
      • thumb
        Oct 23 2011: Nice to see you too and still thanks for your enthusiastic reaction that was removed so quick.

        Energy is limitless but mind work uses very much of it, while the body can generate just a little.
        With humans to be able to represent all impressions most body energy goes to the brain whether these impression originate from the senses or from feeling.

        Within a good connection the spirit can produce a flow that puts information directly into action and bypasses the mind almost completely. This takes less energy. The brain becomes merely the converter without interaction. In that process the controller or the ego is disconnected or switched off. If this happens memory isn’t active. So you can be amazed about what has been said or done but can’t recollect how it was done or where the words came from.

        And of course as you say, most seers and prophets looked for peace without distraction but they didn’t think as far to understand it in terms of biology. The same goes for fasting and all kinds of extremes they put themselves to. It can bring you into that flow and bring experience of all compassing freedom of spirit but that’s not why we were born.

        We wouldn’t have found ways to expand living consciousness if we all searched for ecstasy. Humanity expands its awareness to look outside into the universe and seeing ultimately itself.

        And God never created time, we did.
        • Oct 23 2011: Frans,
          I appreciate your response, definitely there is a point, but still I don't think, that all energy we have is only that our body generates,there must be something more to it, but , frankly, I don't know.
          And sorry for my inappropriate "enthusiastic reaction " :) I've read a lot of your posts recently and your ideas resonated with my thoughts, and helped me to understand some things, so for me it was completely natural reaction , but how could you know? I realise it now, sorry!

          "And God never created time, we did."
          - I have doubts about the second part of your statement, we created a "word" ,the Second Law of Thermodynamics and the entropy concept, but what we really do in time, we grow old and die.
      • thumb
        Oct 24 2011: Natasha,
        if you identify yourself with your body you're right.
        We live one, ever changing moment. That change is within yourself.

        Being alive the body impose on you limits by defining a point in space from which the senses give the impressions from an outside world. Time is needed to bring that point in the presence of another point which we call distance. This takes energy for traveling. That's inherent to matter but as your body decomposes those boundaries vanish as snow in the sunlight. The spirit evaporates to the unborn reality that encompasses all time and space which is the story of all life and all living. Time from this perspective is the total of our journey of development.

        It's a bit complicated to put this all in a few sentences but it may be helpful.
  • Oct 22 2011: Would a blind person believe that we are having this discussion, only if he/she was told that we are?

    Would that same blind person believe we are having this discussion, only if he/she could hear us having it?

    We all make this fundamental decision every day.

    "Seeing is believing."

    "Believing in what we see, is some times harder to believe."
    • thumb
      Oct 22 2011: I've had similar discussions with blind friends. We came to the conclusion that blind people can often "see" more than sighted people, because they are often using many more of their senses.
  • thumb
    Oct 22 2011: Absolutely! There are many things we cannot see with the eyes that I believe in....like energy. I believe in electricity and even though I cannot actually see it, I am always amazed that I can flip a switch and have electric power in my home. I feel the energy connections with people, and I see the results with my eyes, and all other senses. We feel on many different levels, and can "see" with all the senses, if we are open to the possibilities. It is not that difficult to feel/see if a smile is genuine or not:>)
  • Oct 25 2011: Orlando came up with a good example, dark energy and dark matter. These are the two greatest forces that drives the universe on its path through the unknown cold darkness of space. Yet we can't see them, and there all around us, even going right through us, but we can't feel it. As in the air we breath, we can't see it, unless we step into the cold, then we see it in another form as we breath out, yet without it we would perish.
    Perception comes in a lot of forms, hearing, feeling, smelling, but seeing is the most important perception we have, and we are still trying to understand the connections between the two. One day everyone will get it, then everyone will have the same perceptions and no longer disagree, maybe. Can't wait to SEE that day.
  • Oct 23 2011: sure
  • thumb
    Oct 22 2011: It's only with the heart
    that one can see clearly.
    What's essential
    is invisible to the eye.
    - the fox from the little prince
  • Oct 22 2011: How much can we see? :)
    • thumb
      Oct 22 2011: As much as we want to?
      • Oct 22 2011: I guess,
        What is seen is in the eyes of the beholder,
        so nothing new here :)
        • thumb
          Oct 25 2011: Hi Natasha, So every one seeing things from his/her side. by that if we want to collect all sides about something when need to collect all people to make it full side?
        • thumb
          Oct 25 2011: If we want to "collect all sides about something" we need to collect all people...AND/OR...we need to be mindful about looking at, and considering all sides?
          We can do this process as individuals, or as a group?
      • Oct 25 2011: Hi! Coleen and Bilal,
        Colleen, I agree with you,"we need to be mindful about looking at, and considering all sides" to see a bigger picture."The more we see the more we see truly"
        But saying "What is seen is in the eyes of the beholder' I meant that it is a matter of choice.
      • Oct 25 2011: Colleen!,
        I realised, that, actually I missed your question.
        "We can do this process as individuals, or as a group?'
        I believe, that generally we can do something only with ourselves. We are all in our own path and showing respect to other people choices,you accept their vision of truth as a part of 'bigger truth" and it makes your vision clearer. When people "sing" in a group, they are under the risk to forget about the song and start to fight with another group, which sings differently.
  • thumb
    Oct 22 2011: I believe in: emotions; feelings; taste; hearing; touch; smell; thoughts; atoms; x-rays, gamma rays, ultraviolet light, etc; ancestors; dinosaurs; history; systems; process; quarks; power; influence; vision; goals; ideals; countries; belief; abstractions; choice; appreciation; etcetera.

    I believe in you. And I can't see you.

    By the way, we can see electromagnetic waves; it's called light.
    • thumb
      Oct 22 2011: Hi Thomas, Not all electromagnetic waves it's light but the light it's a part of them, If you count these things all of what you belief so you are belief of nothing there are unlimited things we belief in them that can't our mind list them.
      Like :
      1- Children when they suck milk to Breastfeeding. If our brain don't belief in that thing no one can live.
      2- Our Sneezing, If our brain don't belief in that thing no one can live.
      and more.
      • thumb
        Oct 22 2011: Hi Bilal,

        I'm sorry, I cannot figure out what you mean when you say, "... If you count these things all of what you belief so you are belief of nothing there are unlimited things we belief in them that can't our mind list them."

        And, I do know that we cannot see the entire electromagnetic spectrum, that is why the rest of it (x-rays, gamma rays, ultraviolet light, etc) was in my list of things I cannot see but believe in.
        • thumb
          Oct 25 2011: Hi Thomas, So you believe in things your eyes can't seeing them. please From where you know about them? like from you parents or sciences or from where?
  • thumb
    Oct 21 2011: You mean like global warming?
    • thumb
      Oct 22 2011: Hi Gerald, Thanks for your comment that the big thing should all the world care about it, But if we don't make a move no one will move about it our earth destroying and the leaders just caring about their money, we should move faster and more effective.
    • Oct 22 2011: Hi, GErald!
      Global worming is factually seen, it's a scientific endeavor and science operates with facts and data.
  • thumb

    . . 100+

    • 0
    Nov 21 2011: YES. IN GOODNESS.

    "IT IS ONLY WITH THE HEART THAT ONE CAN SEE CLEARLY . What is ESSENTIAL IS INVISIBLE TO THE EYE".

    -Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
  • thumb
    Nov 20 2011: In order to "make it" in this society, we have to believe in ourselves and others. I believe that others will make my contribution a success, though I know I have not received any. If I was not to believe that others would do the right thing...why bother?

    Veronica Page
  • thumb
    Nov 20 2011: You've all gone on a tangent from the question and my reply is yes I do believe in things I cannot see for example I believe in love, I cannot see the edge of the universe however I know its there and I believe in the human spirit of ever evolving humanity for the good of all.
    God thats a personal one and to me and I believe in Jesus (God) the creator of the big bang and all this so called religeouos intolerance,wars and massacres are and always have been an excuse for those in power to gain more land, money and power for themselve as no God would concider murder, killing or greed as done in their name!
  • thumb
    Nov 13 2011: I can see electromagnetic waves. In the visible spectrum it is called light.
    I see a smile I am not much interested if it is genuine or not.
    I cannot see freedom because is an abstract concept.
    I don't believe I live, love and learn.
  • thumb
    Nov 13 2011: Bilal, maybe it's better not to believe.
    You see it or you don't.
    Nothing can be seen by our eyes.
    It is spirit that sees all, while the narrow view of ithe mind hides most of it.
    So seeing is recovering what was hidden, hidden from us by all we do believe.
    .
  • thumb
    Nov 13 2011: anything that can only be known by the impact it makes on the other senses beyond seeing. I believe in gravity, music, communication in words spoken, heart and soul to name a few.
  • thumb
    Nov 11 2011: Bilal, yes, I believe in something I can't see: a way for humanity to reach unity in diversity. You're only missing one ideal out of two, so it should be easy.
  • thumb
    Nov 8 2011: Bilal :

    I don't know if I believe in what I cannot see...but there is plenty I see, that I cannot believe in !

    Take care,
    Denis
  • Oct 26 2011: Bilal religion can never unify this world, we respect each other at all if we do because we are different day we will unify respect will be gone.
  • thumb
    Oct 26 2011: we cant see atoms and sub atomic particles and strings but they are there. these atoms can be entangled and can be connected across the universe in unison and we cannot see that. couldn't every person be connected to each other or something else without seeing or knowing.
  • thumb
    Oct 25 2011: Hi Colleen, I will answer you as a logically answer not accept any error or false, there is one thing can unify the entire world and make them work as brothers and sisters with common point view and common aims to apply it,

    IT IS THE Religion.
    • thumb
      Oct 25 2011: QUOTE: "IT IS THE Religion."

      And there it is!
      • thumb
        Oct 25 2011: Hi Thomas, Don't take a quote from what i said to another posters ask any thing to me i will answer you far from the religion if that bother you? and if 1+1=2 as math
        For each question that the shine logical answer to answer it. not else.
    • thumb
      Oct 25 2011: Bilal,
      You told Orlando, in a previous post...this is not about religion. If you started this discussion as another way to promote a religion, be clear about your intentions.

      Your words Bilal..."Hi Orlando, No this post not about religion"
      • thumb
        Oct 25 2011: Hi Colleen, it's stall this post not about the religion but you asked me about thing make the world unify isn't that right?
        • thumb
          Oct 25 2011: Bilal,
          I do not agree that religion will unify the world, nor do many others agree with your idea.
      • thumb
        Oct 25 2011: Hi Colleen, That correct Not many agree with my idea, But the realty of what our earth headed for will make us choice a religion to correct our path. i will show you an example what we are headed for:

        1- Same-sex marriage (even not happen in animals ).
        2- Smoking (even not happen in animals ).
        3- AIDS (even not happen in animals ).
        4- Massacres (even not happen in animals ).

        And more. We are worse than animals without religion.
        • thumb
          Oct 26 2011: Bilal,
          Religion is not going to correct our path.
          1. There is nothing wrong with same sex marriage.
          2. Smoking is a choice, which religion does not seem to have any control of
          3. Aids is not controled by religion
          4. Many massacres throughout history were CAUSED by religion.

          It appears that you started this discussion simply to promote your religion.
        • thumb
          Oct 26 2011: Hi Bilal,

          Here's the thing: You have a belief that religion will unify the world, in fact, that is one of the fundamental "truths" of your religion ... you believe Islam will unify the world.

          So, as long as you are Muslim, you, more or less, HAVE to believe that.

          It is NOT true. Religion will NOT unify the world. But nothing we can say will convince you that is true.

          Personally, I don't want to convince you. If you believe that to be true, fine. However, I would appreciate it if you do not try to convince me religion will unify the world. This nonsense is not "new to you;" religious fanatics have been promulgating this nonsense for thousands of years. And I suppose will continue for a while longer.

          And to adress your "evidence" ... all of it is false.

          QUOTE: "1- Same-sex marriage (even not happen in animals )."

          By "marriage" I assume you mean homosexual sex: It does happen between animals.

          QUOTE: "2- Smoking (even not happen in animals )."

          Given the opportunity, animals will smoke.

          QUOTE: "3- AIDS (even not happen in animals )."

          HIV/AIDS originated with animals (Green Monkeys.)

          QUOTE: "4- Massacres (even not happen in animals )."

          Animals will massacre other animals - and eat them (usually over territorial rights.)
        • thumb
          Oct 26 2011: Hi Bilal -
          The beautiful thing about religion is each one has the potential to unify the world. What a wonderful outcome that would be! The sad part is humans allow it to divide, because its followers are so attached to believing their religion is the only truth, while judging the behavior of others through limited human lenses.

          I often wonder if God sees it that way. It can only happen when those who follow religions unify on the principle we are all one and it's not our job to judge. I know I sound like a girl with rose colored glasses. But I like it that way :)
        • thumb
          Oct 27 2011: Man! Of course neither same-sex marriage nor smoking happen in non-human animals, marriage and smoking has no meaning for animals. You're dead wrong about the other things. AIDS come from chimpanzees, it's no mystery! A few have died from AIDS, although animals usually have their own epidemics. Massacres?! Nature is a slaughterhouse. Have you never heard of the expression "nature red in tooth and claw"?

          By the way, many animals enjoy themselves some nice male on male action from time to time and there is no religion to tell them otherwise...actually that is a good point:

          5- Religion (even not happen in animals ).

          You like that eh? Beaten at your own game. I had a feeling this conversation was really about religion, you don't win any awards for subtlety.
        • thumb
          Oct 27 2011: The funny thing is, we've all shown you how wrong you are, but you won't listen, you'll just ignore us and start new useless conversations. Why do you expect anybody to listen to you? What about the Golden Rule eh?
        • thumb
          Oct 27 2011: But Matthieu, we don't really know if he's wrong. Those who think he's wrong can only disagree with him when it gets right down to it. Nobody knows what is true. Not even you, Bilal. That's why they call it faith. Those with faith believe. Have a sense of knowing....and choose to trust it. I think it's appropriate to respect other's religious beliefs, as long as they're not hurting other people -- or pushing their beliefs on them. I think that's what tolerance is all about. If we expect tolerance and respect in the world, we have to walk the walk, no?

          That said, honest, clear and direct conversation is a lot better than being led in the back door. I like entering a conversation from the front door- even if it's messy inside.
        • thumb
          Oct 27 2011: He is about AIDS and massacres, that's all I was advancing. He is dead-wrong about that. If his worldview depends highly on that, he's going to have to change it accordingly. But he won't. He'll ignore these points and he'll repeat these inaccuracies again. All of this in the goal of convincing people in the most unconvincing manner, like many before him, comforting himself in his belief, but pissing everyone else off.

          We've had this TEDconversation syndrome at least five time since launch. People who only want to talk about one and only one thing and keep bringing it up in superficially different conversations. Also I think a good TEDconversation ethic would be to check ones facts before advancing an idea. We could have avoided the whole "there are two many women per men in Iraq' conversation for example (is this the new Yahoo Answers?). I feel that we can't have a conversation if there isn't a minimal honesty at the base of it all. Thomas and Colleen pretty much nipped this conversation in the bud, exposing what this conversation is really about and the dishonesty in pretending this was not about religion...again!

          If we talk religion, let's be open about this.
        • thumb
          Oct 27 2011: QUOTE: "Nobody knows what is true."

          Well, of course we don't actually know if this is true or not: SOMEONE MIGHT know.

          QUOTE: "I think it's appropriate to respect other's religious beliefs."

          I think it is appropriate to respect the believer and, as long as the beliefs are presented as beliefs, accept them as such. BUT as soon as a belief is presented as a "universal truth" (like: "Religion WILL unify the world;" or: the world IS 6000 years old; or: we WILL go to heaven or hell after we die; or: we WON'T go to heaven or hell after we die, etc.*) then I think it is really, really okay to ridicule the idea. This can be done while respecting the individual who holds the idea but, in my experience, people who have such beliefs identify so closely with them that, when you ridicule the idea, they take it as a personal attack.

          ----------
          * Personally, anytime anyone says they know what happens after we die, I think that's open for ridicule. Unless of course they have actually died and come back. (Not almost died and been revived ... it is not the same thing. And "remembering" past lives doesn't count either!)

          By the way, there are one or two people who I MIGHT believe if they told me they had died and come back ... but, so far, they haven't; and they are NOT here on TED.

          I'm one of those guys who thinks ANYTHING is POSSIBLE ... but do not expect any natural laws (including the law of probability) to be broken anytime soon, or at all. But if it happens, it happens.
        • thumb
          Oct 27 2011: "We are worse than animal without religion."

          I've always thought that animals were vehilcules for replicating genes via sexual reproduction.
          It's the first time someone tells me I'm worse than that.

          Can't I get some credit for having a metabolism and offspring?
        • thumb
          Oct 27 2011: Agreed Matthieu. That's what I meant about not liking going in through the back door.

          I'm sure TED is well aware of it, and wanting to give him the benefit of the doubt.
          There's probably some lenience with community members who aren't fluent too. It takes time to get comfortable writing - particularly if someone is new here.
    • thumb
      Nov 13 2011: You make a fairly bold claim that religion can unify the world. I am skeptic to say the least.

      So let's start small . . . Show us how to unify the people on this thread, "with a common point of view and common aims to apply it." Good luck!

      So long as people have the ability to think creatively and independently, you will never have 100% common points of view or common aims.
      • thumb
        Nov 13 2011: Good idea. There are only seven people in this thread. Let's see if we can be united through ... well, anything.

        Here's my input: We are all living humans ... that may be the only thing that "unites" us.

        As humans, we know:

        - We like to be happy
        - We do not like pain, discomfort, or to be unhappy
        - We like to be appreciated, included, and respected
        - Our biology is the same
        - We share the earth.

        I think most people would agree to those points. Beyond that we begin to diverge - for example some of us think that to be happy we have to be "Muslim" or "Christian" or free from "dogmatic thinking."

        We think we are "right" and other people are "wrong." (It is actually forced upon us by the way we think and talk.)

        We are not really rational although we have the capacity to be so.

        We engage in "magic thinking" (If everyone became a Muslim, there would be peace on earth ... or Christian ... or a "Rational Skeptic" ... or whatever.)

        I do not think religion will unite the seven of us. What might?

        How shall we achieve unity?
        • thumb
          Nov 13 2011: I agree with what you have written Thomas.
          In addition...I believe that we all share the same emotions/feelings at one time or another...happiness/unhappiness, joy/sadness contentment/discontent, clarity/confusion, anger, frustration, etc. I believe that on some level, we all want to love and be loved. I believe we are more the same than different. We embrace different teachings, but our underlying emotions are much the same. It is how we choose to use the information that causes us to seem different.
        • thumb
          Nov 13 2011: Your list of common points is hard to argue with, though the real trick would be getting everyone to acknowledge and respect those common traits in other people. A great deal of discord in this world is nothing more (or less!) than claiming those things as rights for oneself while denying them to others.

          Perhaps unity isn't a realistic goal, but tolerance is. We all have our own points of view, drives, and goals, but if we can at least coexist and communicate without tearing each other down I think we will have achieved something worthwhile. For the most part I see this ethic at work in TED forums, moreso than in other threaded conversations on the 'net.

          I really think the work of John Hunter (The "World Peace" Game) is relevant to the larger conversation we're having:

          http://www.ted.com/talks/john_hunter_on_the_world_peace_game.html

          What Hunter's "game" teaches children is the art of negotiation despite conflicting interests. Life can be terribly complex, with powerful motives running counter to each other. Hunter's students learn to see those motivations, and better yet to devise realistic solutions for tolerance and coexistence.
      • thumb
        Nov 13 2011: World unity might be a bit of a stretch but what about unity of seven people?

        Perhaps we can start with accepting we are human, share a common biology, and psychology; and are tolerant of ... what?
        • thumb
          Nov 13 2011: . . . tolerant of different and even offensive ideas, and willing to communicate with each other over those ideas while maintaining an open door to all participants. We can be united in our desire to exchange thoughts despite profound disagreements.
    • thumb
      Nov 13 2011: QUOTE: " ...tolerant of different and even offensive ideas ..."

      Hmmm ... I'm not sure I'm on board with this part.

      It depends on what you mean by "tolerate."

      There are certain ideas that I am quite intolerant of. I do not mind if someone wants to believe the world is 6000 years old but I do mind if they want to teach it as science or as truth. Most people would "give me that one." But what about this [from a recent TED conversation] asserting, categorically, that sexual orientation is a choice (based on anecdotal evidence;) when, in fact, research indicates sexual orientation is the outcome of genetics, in utero maternal hormones, and brain development?

      Again, I do not mind if an individual, or a group of individuals, believe sexual orientation is a choice, but I do mind if they offer it as a categorical answer to someone else who is asking the question.

      QUOTE: " ... willing to communicate with each other over those ideas while maintaining an open door to all participants."

      I am willing to communicate with most anyone but I am not willing to accept, for example, the world is 6000 years old; or, as another example, that because someone believes in the Bible or the Quran that this imbues them with "inerrancy" of factual veracity.

      An application of this is: We have a TEDster who believes the world was completely flooded as described in the Bible and this is why we find marine fossils on mountain tops. He's a really nice guy. I have no problem with him personally but this is not an idea I am willing to "tolerate" as in, "Well, yes, the diluvial-hypothesis is as plausible as, say, Plate Tectonics."

      Now, if by "tolerate" you mean that we accept our ideas might be challenged, and in some cases ridiculed*, by those who do not believe them to be true, then we (you and I) might be in agreement on this point as well.

      ---
      * Ridicule is perhaps more than some ideas deserve: Harold Camping's recent predictions (plural) of the end of the world come to mind.
  • thumb
    Oct 23 2011: I'd like to point out that you can see the effects of the electromagnetic force directly and indirectly in day to day life. Eyes can be very deceiving. Evidence does not come from eyes only. That would be preposterous.
    • thumb
      Oct 25 2011: Hi Matthieu, My point in this question about do you belief what you can seeing in your eyes what about you can't seeing in your eyes do you belief it or not?
      • thumb
        Oct 25 2011: I believe what I can't see with my eyes if there's sufficient evidence leading to this conclusion. On the other hand, that which I can't see AND for which there is no evidence whatsoever can only ever be a wild guess. Whatever I believe in that realm, I would not let that influence my day to day decisions because it's more likely false than true. In fact, probabilistically speaking, it's almost certainly false.