Ha! Good one, Liz... :-)

Jim - Read what I said again...

"The only thing more powerful than that faith is direct experience, accompanied by accurate knowledge of what is actually happening."

That is what the scientist in the lab has. Direct experience. That is what the patient has who has undergone a specific treatment, and seen the results. Direct Experience. That is also what the doctor, the acupuncturist, and the chiropractor have, regarding the treatment methods they use.

As for those who do not have such direct experience, they are taking someone else's word on it...and how reliable that someone else is, is then the real question. I may consider him totally reliable, somewhat reliable, or not very reliable at all...and upon this I bring to bear my logic, and like you I am a very strong believer in logic! But I am an equally stronger believer in direct experience, which is more valuable than secondhand information, no matter how "authoritative" it appears.

Do sperm whales exist? My sense of logic tells me that YES they do, although I have never actually seen one in the flesh. I have seen pictures of them, I've read books about them, I've seen films of them. Now...pictures, books and films can all be faked, can't they? However, my sense of logic tells me that it is virtually inconceivable that everyone from Hermann Melville to now...uncountable thousands of people...have all concocted a false story about sperm whales. Right? It would be highly illogical and paranoid to think so. So both you and I use our logic and we believe in sperm whales. We do so as a matter of faith, supported by a good deal of logic and common sense.

Now are vaccinations, viagra, radiation treatments, and such a good idea? That's a much more complex and debatable matter than the existence of sperm whales. Accordingly, I am far less inclined to automatically have faith in those forms of treatment, despite the fact that a lot of present medical authorities support them. A lot of others do not. It depends whose book you CHOOSE to read.

The conventional medical authorities have already been wrong in the past about a whole bunch of things (like bleeding people for every little ill...or like thalidomide), and I am not about to give them carte blanche now, plus there is some pretty compelling literature out there which presents a radically different viewpoint to theirs.

My sense of logic has just as much to do with evaluating reality as yours does, I can assure you, and I ALWAYS bring logic to bear on any question that is in front of me. If direct experience contradicts what appears to be common logic, then there's a factor involved that is not commonly known or acknowledged, and further inquiry is necessary in that case. It was common knowledge in Rome that lining wine bottles with lead was completely harmless, and gave a good taste to the wine. They were dead WRONG about the "harmless" part.

I reiterate my position that the ordinary man in the street bases most of his opinions on faith (supported by whatever amount of logic he is naturally inclined toward) and on what amounts to second or thirdhand information. Most opinions are based on a mixture of faith, habit, and logic.

That's why people make that wisecrack "Opinions are like ***holes...everybody's got one."

- LH