[December 2003 journal entry]
Which of two paradigms – one that finds divine will/intent immediately and directly expressed in any/every event or one that explains events in terms of nature’s (ir)regularities – makes the best sense of the data re human experience? For me, it is the latter. Two keys – (1) what is considered to be data and (2) the weight given to various kinds of data. ‘Make sense’ describes how most individuals make their way through the day. If a paradigm does not make the best sense of the data re human experience, then why would it continue to be held/used?