Validation, Facts

It is not always clear to me what scientific gossip is getting at, while I feel something essential in the speech of a religious person—in as much as they talk from experience. Yet, when a creation apologist constructs an exhibition in which men and dinosaurs live together, he is instead fighting a factual battle. And here I can’t help but feel this argument starts from a weakened position—since it starts from a burdened position of reconciling texts and traditions.

There is a style of living in which validation is not necessary anyway.

It is possible that my experience can’t tell me one way or another about a fact—but why doubt the fact either? You don’t have to play the facts game in order to win an audience.

Simply think on the impossibility of validating love (See lecture The Romantic). Or pain. And then take as a positive example the possibility of experiencing the fall of man (See 19.07.15, Reflection on the Disclosure of World). No other will be able to tell me about this experience, which is yours, and I will have a lot to learn about the world (colloquially ‘my’ world).

Perhaps all of this is because I want to defend the experience and wish for a partner among the religious. The weight of a factual world weighs too heavy in conversation. There is something of a spirit of imperialism which paints everything around me—including discourse and knowledge. (See 02.07.16, Reflection on a Universe)