But you also need to understand that there is also ' faith-informed ' skeptics/materialists as well. They see some study that says that most scientists don't believe in God, but they think something along the lines of: These scientists are really smart and sciency. They must know what they're talking about, so its no coincidence that they are ________ (insert worldview). ' However, simply following along with what scientists believe is 'faith-based' as well, as they don't necessarily have all the data on hand, and they are humans who suffer from the same biases that your normal laborer does. They are open to the same group-think mentality, and willingness to seek evidence only inside your own worldview as faith-based proponents.
Good evidence of this is the recent interview with Searle. He didn't even know that 'modern' parapsychology existed. He knew there was some flare-up after the Rhine era, but he didnt know about the new methodology and the new findings. So naturally, hes going to dismiss parapsychology with that mindset.
There are a vast array of colors in this spectrum of worldviews. Just because I feel the evidence of psi and the afterlife is sufficient doesn't mean my critical thinking skills are nonexistent, that I am afraid of death, or that I am blocking out other evidence and unwilling to change. It simply means I find that evidence to be sufficient to accept phenomena. If new evidence arises, then I hope I would be fearless in changing my beliefs.
Likewise, just because someone doesn't accept the evidence of psi and the afterlife as sufficient doesn't mean that they are blocking it out, or that they are hopeless slaves to materialist ideology. It just means that they find the evidence insufficient to accept that phenomena.
Naturally, there are people on both sides who simply vote on party lines; Those people exist on both sides, not just proponent sides.
