Would you describe yourself as a rational person? a person who solves problem? a person who connects the dots easily?
I expect everyone would probably identify themselves as a "rational" person. As far as "connecting the dots easily", I do see patterns. Everything fits into a pattern, and those patterns repeat throughout the world on both a macro level, and a micro level. As I have gotten older I see these patterns more easily, because I have experienced them more. So yes, I believe I do connect the dots easily.
I think it's safe to say, and you'd probably agree, that people seeing themselves as rational do not see themselves as "filling in the gaps." Our beliefs or lack there of is just how we see the world around us. That's not to say that their aren't gaps and that we actively try to fill them, but I think the gaps that we're trying to fill are our longings for happiness, belonging, and purpose. Obviously, how we view the world has a strong influence on how we go about filling in those very real, very important gaps.I don't see these "gaps" into which I need to fit some sort of mystical functionary.
I expect everyone would probably identify themselves as a "rational" person.
Well, it was kantos original post that established the idea of "gaps" in my head. So what I read him as saying is that there are worldviews that require leaps of logic - Noah's Ark, for example - that provides a very real "gap" between the average everyday experience of humans in the world, and a world in which penguins walk from Antarctica, through Africa, and get on a boat, and that's why they exist today. A logical person is welcome to believe whatever they want, but at some point logic is going to dictate things happened one way, while their belief dictates they believe things happened a different way. This is the "gap" that I believe kantos was referring to in the initial post. At least, that's how I interpreted it. And that's why I commented. This "gap" idea was a new way for me to consider how others view the world, and how they come to insert magical thinking into the gaps in their particular worldview and narrative. Religious people aren't dumb or ignorant of the facts, or whatever. They aren't idiots with blinders on. (Generally speaking.) Religious people just have a particular worldview, and it requires more machinery than my worldview. They fill the "gaps" they see with gods, miracles, whatever. I, having a different worldview, don't see the gaps they see, and therefore have no need for those other bits of machinery. Neither is right or wrong. It's just sort of a mechanistic explanation for a different set of perspectives. Did I explain that clearly, or completely muck it up?
While this is perfectly stated on what my own thoughts started out as with regards to these "gaps" (for some reason I couldn't put into words), your POV, goobster, of these gaps expand upon and enrich the theory by extending to the appeal to logos here: If anything, I'm voicing my agreement with rd: very well stated and just as relevant. Appreciate y'all's contributions.That's not to say that their aren't gaps and that we actively try to fill them, but I think the gaps that we're trying to fill are our longings for happiness, belonging, and purpose. Obviously, how we view the world has a strong influence on how we go about filling in those very real, very important gaps.
A logical person is welcome to believe whatever they want, but at some point logic is going to dictate things happened one way, while their belief dictates they believe things happened a different way. This is the "gap" that I believe kantos was referring to in the initial post. At least, that's how I interpreted it.