[MD] Metaphysics

[markhsmit]

Krimel,
I am not sure if the glass analogy is appropriate.  I merely
wish to provide a viewpoint that will enable awakening (as
I see it of course), from the faith in science above all.  Many
seem to use scientific arguments as if they cannot be questioned.
Such "truth" is analogous to religion.

But I do have faith (as it were), and do not see humanity as a
hopeless lot.  From up here on my pedestal I see hope.

Mark

On Jan 16, 2010, at 12:24:01 PM, Krimel <Krimel at Krimel.com> wrote:
From:   Krimel <Krimel at Krimel.com>
Subject:    Re: [MD] Metaphysics
Date:   January 16, 2010 12:24:01 PM PST
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
[Krimel earlier]
I am happy to acknowledge a degree of faith in science. I have said so, many
times in the past. But I would like to point out that much of that "faith"
is in the self correcting nature of the ongoing pursuit of science and not
in any particular scientific claim. Science does not claim to yield a final
truth that cannot be questioned or challenged. In fact it demands quite the
opposite.

[Mark]
I agree with you Krimel, in terms of the self correcting nature of science.
However, this does not happen very quickly, and in the mean time the current
version of science is accepted as truth, not conjecture.  

[Krimel]
Yes there is a conservations static quality to any system of thought. I
would still argue that science at least provides the mechanisms for dynamic
change. Still, static latching is its own form of virtue. If change happens
too quickly it produces chaos in the bad sense.

[Mark]
Scientists are people with all the flaws.  Science as an institution is
therefore misguided, often for personal gain.  And why not, as a living it
is not different from being a lawyer, arguing your point, trying to convince
others that you are right.  

[Krimel]
I fear that the contingencies of the legal profession often make truth
subservient to rhetoric. But I don't think those contingency operate with
the same force in the scientific community, which tends to bore many because
it focuses on truth over rhetoric. 

[Mark]
While science may not claim to yield a final truth, such a claim is lost on
the non-scientist.  

[Krimel]
The claim is lost on all who just want to be told the truth and who respect
authority over reason.

[Mark]
Science is used by politicians in the same way that God is used by the
Church.  It is used for justification of action, as though it were a higher
truth, for the imparting of restrictions which are deemed to be necessary to
uphold that higher truth.

[Krimel]
Politicians like lawyer operate under different contingencies. I don't hold
scientists or for that matter theologians responsible for the abuses of
politician. 

[Mark]
Now pure science is another thing, but it is hard to make a living there.

[Krimel]
It is truly sad that pure science produces "poor" scientists. I like to
think their willingness to work for less is a testimony to their commitment
to truth over comfort.

[Mark]
All I ask is that it is seen for what it is, a temporary set of agreed upon
rules, that will be totally different in 100 years.  We only experience
reality through one body, that will all change once we understand it.

[Krimel]
No argument with this. I suspect the real difference is that to me this
suggests a glass half full, while it looks half empty to you.




Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/