> i think the issue is that a lot of people *don't* know the difference
> and/or don't maintain it. it seems from your post -- unless i misread
> it -- that that might include yourself. that's something we can
> actually talk about, isn't it? as opposed to whether or not someone is
> stupid to believe in god?
>
> and if we do agree there's a difference, an important one (or two or
> whatever), then what's the issue here?
>
I think that the issue is (or was) your 'what is to be done' enquiry.
> and if we don't want to do it *in a religious mode* (i.e., by
> "converting" people from religion to . . . what? atheism? communism?
> what?), then it cannot be some bizarre, manipulative appeal to
> unconscious needs, but by trying to open up the genuine thinking that
> helps people see flaws in their own logic.
I suggested that turning the scientific research community into a priesthood would introduce logic into religion, and among other things permit faith-based funding to be employed in the pursuit of scientific research (knowledge). Into the unknown ...
Martin