Originally Posted By: Tempest
You said: "But I can't discount the idea that more knowledge about how those natural models are constituted won't blow holes in my belief system."
That sounds very wide open...if not complete. How about substantially complete?
In my mind, I am just recognizing that beliefs are a result of the intersection of a place in time, people, and problems to be solved. At one time people believed that: weather was caused by angry supreme beings, the earth was flat, they believed in Newtonian physics, you can go on and on. They had these beliefs because they proved adequate, for a while. But when new factors enter the equation, as they often do, the old beliefs don't necessarily work anymore, providing the drive for finding new theories.
I'm admitting that, while my theories are adequate for myself, at this point in time, with the problems I see, that can change. I don't believe that I have all the right ideas to change the world, nor that I am personally responsible for doing so.
I see problems as evidence of insufficient solutions. If the solutions were adequate, the problems would never have been noticed as problems, just events, if they were noticed at all.
The process of people interacting in society, using their respective opinions, points of view, etc, will lead to solutions of problems. It won't be without conflict, but in the end we will all own it. We always own what we have, like it or not.
In the end, my belief in this process of how problems will be resolved is stronger than my belief in any categorized ideology. Again, I don't see that I am personally responsible for determining "truth", or inflicting it on the world.