[lbo-talk] Neo-Lamarckianism???? Come on!

Miles Jackson cqmv at pdx.edu
Tue Jan 15 08:30:44 PST 2008


John Thornton wrote:
> Miles Jackson wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm not seeing the essential incompatibility of doing science and
>> believing in a god.
>>
>
> Believing that an omniscient omnipotent being who can create the
> universe is integrated into which branch of science?
>
Your argument is based on the flawed premise that scientists only believe things that are supported by scientific evidence. Scientists have many beliefs that are not related to science at all. For instance, a scientist can believe "I love my husband", "24 is a stupid, jingoistic TV show", "Kurosawa is the greatest director of the 20th century", and so on without basing those beliefs on scientific evidence. Religion, like many aspects of social life, is not part of a scientific discipline; thus applying the scientific standards of evidence to religion is as silly as applying religious standards to evaluate science. For almost all scientists, their religious beliefs, like their beliefs about art and literature, are just irrelevant to their scientific work.

Miles



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list