The Hole-y Truth

Lett's argument was very well organized, precise and easy to understand. In AField Guide to Critical Thinking, Lett outlines the information needed in orderto fairly and reasonably evaluate evidence. By applying the rules ofFalsifiability, Logic, Comprehensiveness, Honesty, Replicability and Sufficiencywe can make sure that our arguments and beliefs are well-founded and logical, atleast until additional evidence surfaces that may lead us to believe otherwise.This is probably why I have had a hard time sticking to any particular set ofbeliefs. Throughout my life, as my scope of knowledge, level of understanding,ideas regarding morality and ethics and views regarding the world, have changeddramatically and I cannot imagine being 'locked into' any set of beliefs andbeing made to hold onto them even when I have clearly outgrown them. I comeacross that often, people who have clearly realized how ridiculous some of theirbeliefs are, and yet they refuse to let go of them because either their family,or their church, or their culture, would shun them because of it. We areterrified to go against the grain so we will set aside logic, rationality andreason, even if it persists in every other aspect of our lives, just so that wedo not have to feel the discomfort that goes along with changing one's beliefs.One aspect of Lett's article that resonated with me was his comment about"government conspiracies." I find most conspiracy theories to be quiteentertaining, and quite a few of them tend to hold more water than mostreligious arguments that I have heard! The world conspiracy brings up a lot ofnegative connotation but in reality, it is my opinion that these theories havejust as much plausibility as any other theory out there. We cannot deny thatthere is a possibility and/or a motive that the government or the military wouldwant to keep certain operations out of the public eye and may try to throwthings off or cater to "human interest in the absurd" and allow people'simaginations to run wild and wreak havoc on the truth. Realistically, I think alot of the time we do not know the truth and the evidence presented to us astruth does not tell the whole story and often appears holey (not holy) andincomplete (much like religious claims). My point is that labeling something asa "conspiracy theory" should not exempt it from being susceptible to the sameset of rules of evaluation that Lett argued should be applied to any beliefs. Iam always willing to be proven wrong when the evidence is there to support it!