[MD] Dawkins a Materialist

[ian glendinning]

DMB, Case, David, Dan et al, ///

DMB, you said to Case
What sense does it make to criticize one kind
faith from the standpoint of a different sort of faith?

I say, I've had this debate with you before too DMB.
It's not the faith, but the kind of faith that matters. For all its
objectivism, science also relies on faith (in its methods). It still
has mysterious beliefs at its boundaries. The real point is "blind"
faith in authoritity (a purely social quality), something science
avoids.

Interestingly, I've just re-read Ilya Progigine at David M's
recommendation. If nothing else it reminds how, even in science,
authority is not to be trusted, if it doesn't ring true.

Ian.



On 12/26/06, David M <davidint at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi Case
>
>  I guess where we really part com
> pany is with the idea that science's
>  assumptions amount to doctrine.
>
> DM: Do you know anyone in phil of
> science or history of science who would
> agree with you here? People get attached to their
> assumptions, that makes them a doctrine,
> of course, some hold them loose, some
> with fervour, but we people are people and
> get more attached than not.
>
> 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/
>