Questions for Xians: Do You Actually Know The Difference?

The Friendly Atheist noticed an amusing interview: Nervous Americans may now relax because Barack Obama is NOT the Antichrist, says the author who made a pantload of money writing fiction about that subject.

One of the commenters remarks: "It is very telling that folks are asking a writer of FICTION about whether a real person is the antichrist."

Like some of my co-bloggers at The Raytractors, I continue to drive by the wreckage of Ray Dumbfort's blog (whatever its name is today) to gawk at the rusting remains of ratiocination on display there.  A recent post about a movie based on Charles Dickens' classic novel A Tale of Two Cities contained this little gem:

"Sadly, the movie dropped the fact that the hero was converted to Christianity during the last few days of his life...."  (Italics mine.)

Er, Ray.  The movie is fiction.  It's based on a novel -- also fiction.  By definition, fiction isn't about facts!

Then there was the commenter -- at Ray's I think, though I can't remember now -- who observed that in one of the Indiana Jones movies, the hero is forced to abandon science and rely instead on faith to save his father's life.  The commenter was referring to the sequence where Indy must pass a series of tests involving interpretations of an ancient text, where either misinterpretation or hesitation will get him killed instantly. As I hazily recall, this was little more than an excuse for lots of then-pretty-cool 1980s special effects to give the impression of Indy stepping off a cliff into an abyss, only to have a bridge magically materialize under his feet.

The commenter implied (perhaps unintentionally, you never can be sure with the Raylians) that all scientists will or must do something similar at some time.  Because as we all know, science just doesn't count in matters of life and death.  For that matter, reality doesn't really count; what counts is how well you mumbled your magic spells and whether the ferryman on the River Styx was paying attention to your mumbles.

Or something like that.

It's enough to make you wonder whether bleevers are actually aware of the difference between fact and fiction.

They do recognize the human capacity for error; hence their constant whining chorus of "but what if yer wrong?"  It's probably useless to point out that mistakes can only occur if a) truth is consistent with itself and b) getting it right requires finding the actual truth, as opposed to picking a plot that you like and sticking with it long after the lights have come up and the ushers are trying to clean chewing gum off the floor.

We know that some of them are smart enough to realize when they've screwed up, even if it takes them several centuries to get around to admitting it, as in the case of the Catholic Church and their "pardoning" of Galileo for being -- ahem -- right.  I'd die of shock if I heard someone like James Dobson saying: "Ah, y'know, it seems that -- ahem -- it now appears that maybe, ah, maybe we shouldn't have voted for Dumbya after all...."