[MD] Dawkins a Materialist

[david buchanan]

Ian said:
The telling issue for me though is the quote from the organisation, (Museum 
of Creation) justifying literal belief in Genesis, as just as valid an "a 
priori" assumption as Dawkins belief in materialism. ...I'd have to say I 
agree. Thank god it's not a matter of choice between the two for MoQ'ers. 
Literal materialism is as dead as literal gods. Neither a priori assumption 
is valid.

dmb says:
That's not what the MOQ says, that's what Quine says. And even then its only 
true on a philosophical level. The fact is, the "assumptions" of scientific 
materialism work perfectly well on a practial level every day of the week. 
In conventional reality, where the museum of creation is being built, there 
are social, political, intellectual and moral issues at stake, all of which 
you are ignoring entirely. And on that level the myth of materialism is not 
at all dead. Nearly everyone in the West still believes in it. Doubting it 
never even occurs to most people. In any case, the MOQ's distinction between 
social and intellectual values prevents us from coming to the ridiculous 
conclusion that science and fundamentalism are equally valid or invalid. 
Agreeing with the creationists in their attitude toward science is 
anti-intellectual and, I think, immoral according to the MOQ.

As Ken Wilber says about the extreme postmodernists, they equalize science 
and religion by shooting them both in the head.

It has to be said. This is more drivel. (I'm soaked) It has to be asked. 
What's the point of undermining every distinction?

Thanks,
dmb

_________________________________________________________________
Get free, personalized commercial-free online radio with MSN Radio powered 
by Pandora http://radio.msn.com/?icid=T002MSN03A07001