[lbo-talk] The Ungodly Delusions

ravi ravi.bulk at gmail.com
Tue Oct 24 09:13:48 PDT 2006


At around 24/10/06 11:19 am, Dwayne Monroe wrote:
>
> I do see your point (and appreciate the replacement of
> deism with 'scientism' in the hot seat) but hope you
> realize that in those specific cases the cause of your
> distress was probably your teachers not really knowing
> (and I mean, *really* knowing) what they were on
> about.
>

True... their faith sustained them, they didn't need to know more ;-). Now we could say that there are different kinds of faith: blind faith and faith that is based on some shrewd criteria (it works, I trust the person who wrote about it, or the process that brought it about, etc), but most of these apply for theism as well, when seen in their full range (not just as a single issue: the belief in the existence of such a thing as "god").


> Do you suppose Newton would have experienced similar
> difficulties answering your inverse square law
> question? Or any of the astro-navigators who
> calculated Spirit and Opportunity's successful
> journeys to Mars?

Well, the latter for sure know how to put the laws of physics to best use. But with respect to answering such questions: on the one hand perhaps they are meaningless questions (as the logical positivists may say) or perhaps Kline points to an answer: the shift in mathematics/sciences from physical explanation to mathematical description.

My post was semi-humorous and intended to bait a few of the usual suspects. I had not accounted for the possibility that you might chip in with a considered response, which is the reason for my attempt at a bit more seriousness above. However, lest we foreground old daemons, I will return to silliness and flame-baits after this one.

--ravi



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list