<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Incomplete Penetrance and the Complexity of Belief</title>
	<atom:link href="http://telicthoughts.com/incomplete-penetrance-and-the-complexity-of-belief/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://telicthoughts.com/incomplete-penetrance-and-the-complexity-of-belief/</link>
	<description>An independent blog about intelligent design</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 07 Sep 2008 16:51:36 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: MikeGene</title>
		<link>http://telicthoughts.com/incomplete-penetrance-and-the-complexity-of-belief/#comment-140805</link>
		<dc:creator>MikeGene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 01:05:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://telicthoughts.com/incomplete-penetrance-and-the-complexity-of-belief/#comment-140805</guid>
		<description>Hi kenter,

Thanks for commenting.  I happen to think this is a very important topic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi kenter,</p>
<p>Thanks for commenting.  I happen to think this is a very important topic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kenter</title>
		<link>http://telicthoughts.com/incomplete-penetrance-and-the-complexity-of-belief/#comment-140715</link>
		<dc:creator>kenter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Oct 2007 03:36:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://telicthoughts.com/incomplete-penetrance-and-the-complexity-of-belief/#comment-140715</guid>
		<description>MikeGene writes:
&lt;blockquote&gt;We not only believe differently, but we think differently. Thus, an important lesson in life is to realize that other people are not extensions of your self.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I've just recently, in the past few months, been impressed by the truth of this statement, particularly in the context of worship-style needs -- some folks need the "jump and dance and clap" style; some need the "sit quietly and meditate" style. That doesn't mean that one style is right and the other is wrong. I've known one group to condemn the other group because "they're doing it wrong!"

Of course the principle applies in other areas as well. As I read your post it struck me that I see this very often on Slashdot and Digg (two of my fave sites) anytime the discussion turns to creation/evolution/ID. It seems that people (the Darwinistas mostly, in my experience) resort to name-calling and accusing their opponents of stupidity and blindness and "science-bashing". I've been able to see that it's not always a matter of stupidity or ignorance (although sometimes it is), but rather a matter of the person's mental paradigm, or as you put it, the "penetrance" of the idea as filtered by their background environment.

It's rather validating of my increased realization of this principle to see someone else state it. Thanks!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MikeGene writes:</p>
<blockquote><p>We not only believe differently, but we think differently. Thus, an important lesson in life is to realize that other people are not extensions of your self.</p></blockquote>
<p>I&#039;ve just recently, in the past few months, been impressed by the truth of this statement, particularly in the context of worship-style needs &#8212; some folks need the &#034;jump and dance and clap&#034; style; some need the &#034;sit quietly and meditate&#034; style. That doesn&#039;t mean that one style is right and the other is wrong. I&#039;ve known one group to condemn the other group because &#034;they&#039;re doing it wrong!&#034;</p>
<p>Of course the principle applies in other areas as well. As I read your post it struck me that I see this very often on Slashdot and Digg (two of my fave sites) anytime the discussion turns to creation/evolution/ID. It seems that people (the Darwinistas mostly, in my experience) resort to name-calling and accusing their opponents of stupidity and blindness and &#034;science-bashing&#034;. I&#039;ve been able to see that it&#039;s not always a matter of stupidity or ignorance (although sometimes it is), but rather a matter of the person&#039;s mental paradigm, or as you put it, the &#034;penetrance&#034; of the idea as filtered by their background environment.</p>
<p>It&#039;s rather validating of my increased realization of this principle to see someone else state it. Thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
