[MD] Debate on Science_ReligionToday

David M davidint at blueyonder.co.uk
Thu Nov 23 12:59:36 PST 2006 

Hi Case

You really need to challenge yourself a bit more.

I need a good hard book every week, nothing else
will do.

I've sent you something brief to read that may help
to explain what I mean.

The problem is that SOM leaves us without hope,
you're problem is lack of  hope too perhaps.
A science only perspective is all SQ and no
DQ and no projects worth getting up for in the
morning. The reduction of living to functioning
brought about by our authoritarian and conformist
societies adds to this as well don't you think?

The space project was a good example of a
possible genuine and communal project.

David M

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Case" <Case at iSpots.com>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 3:37 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] Debate on Science_ReligionToday


> David M,
>
> Thanks for the suggestion but I am not unaware of the dangers of 
> scientism.
> I do tend to think they are over rated, especially in the face of 
> religious
> dogmatism. I fully understand the leap of faith I take in accepting a
> scientific world view and have expounded on it at length in the past.
>
> But awareness of the nuances does little to change the broad outlines. 
> When
> Ian for example says he likes Dawkins ideas but rejects his snotty 
> attitude
> I sympathize but in the end color me Dawkins.
>
> I mostly listen to serious books and lectures these days. Reading has 
> always
> been recreational for me. I have to force myself to read serious works and
> so I don't. I listen but I listen a lot. As for reading I have a back log
> that includes finishing the Probability series by Nancy Kress, Orson Scott
> Cards novels on Ender's Children, filling in some Ann Rice that I have
> missed and eventually Harry Potter now that the series is almost done. 
> Then
> there is the latest from Carl Hiaasen. Somewhere in there I plan to mix in
> Dan's suggestion of some Cormac McCarthy.
>
> But if you would like to explain Critchley's views I am happy to listen. I
> mean it's not like I want to be part of the problem. Which problem to you
> mean by the way?
>
> Case
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
> [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of David M
> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 3:12 PM
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] Debate on Science_ReligionToday
>
> Hi Case
>
> I too love science but you're falling into scientism
> here. I would recommend Simon Critchley's 'Continental
> Philosophy' to see the limits of scientism, exactly the limits
> MOQ describes, -it is a short cheap book and you'll thank me.
>
> Read it or you'll remain part of the problem. This is a door I am opening,
> only you can walk through it. Challenge your suppositions.
>
> Regards
> David M
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Case" <Case at iSpots.com>
> To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 3:25 AM
> Subject: Re: [MD] Debate on Science_ReligionToday
>
>
>> I'm sorry, I read the Times article I must have missed the disturbing
>> part.
>> While the article offers up sound bites from Dawkins and Weinberg. The
>> Tyson
>> bit covered the issue pretty well.
>>
>> The history of science is the history of religion and philosophy taking 
>> an
>> ass whipping. Belief in the supernatural or in absolutely hypothetical
>> abstract concepts of being-nothing-essential-platonic forms and house of
>> cards rationalism, these are recreational sports thoughtful people tinker
>> with while the big boys figure out what is going on.
>>
>> Show me a theological idea that has confronted science head on and 
>> remains
>> anything but an interesting historical oddity. What's left is just 
>> waiting
>> its turn.
>>
>> Case
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
>> [mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of gav
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 8:45 PM
>> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>> Subject: Re: [MD] Debate on Science_ReligionToday
>>
>> ahh, but what happens when science becomes a
>> religion....
>>
>> dawkins and weinberg are hardly helping matters,
>> unless their avowed nihilism is taken as a stepping
>> stone rather than the destination that they take it to
>> be (their best years are def behind them).
>>
>> of course we need to be fair: science is still
>> generally swimming around in SOM....it is up to
>> philosophy to help them get out of the kiddie pool.
>>
>>
>> --- Robert Robinson <bill_robbie at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> NY Times weekly Tuesday's Science Section today had
>>> a by "George Johnson" article devoted to the
>>> Science/ Religion debate that reminds one of
>>> discussions that appear in this group periodically.
>>>
>>>   The article quoted Dr. Steve Weinberg, "the more
>>> the universe seems comprehensible, the more it also
>>> seems pointless", then he goes further: "Anything
>>> that we scientists can do to weaken the hold of
>>> religion should be done and may in the end be our
>>> greatest contribution to civilization."
>>>
>>>   Dr. Rich Dawkins (Oxford Evolutionary biologist)
>>> and conferee at the reported on event is author of
>>> the National best seller book "The God Delusion."
>>>
>>>   The article makes the point that when scientists
>>> periodically convert from experimentation, problem
>>> solving, fact and evidence gathering to the God
>>> justification for natural phenomena than their most
>>> productive life as a creative cutting edge scientist
>>> are usually about over.
>>>
>>>   The article begins with another Steve
>>> Weinberg...Nobel Laureate, physics quotation, "The
>>> world need to wake up from its long nightmare of
>>> religious belief". Moreover, Dawkins believes
>>> religious education is "brain-washing" and "Child
>>> abuse."
>>>
>>>   One speaker after another lined up to present the
>>> general message challenging scientists to be less
>>> timid about challenging unverifiable teachings about
>>> nature based only on scripture and belief. Science's
>>> core being: intellectual honesty, said Sam Harris, a
>>> doctoral student in Neuroscience and the author of
>>> "The End of Faith: Religion, Terror and the Future
>>> of Reason" and "Letter to a Christian Nation."
>>>
>>>   Another profound moment was Nobelist, chemistry by
>>> Sir Harold Krot's: call for  the John Templeton
>>> Foundation to give its next prize for "progress in
>>> spiritual discoveries" to an atheist.  I myself
>>> would wish to nominate the 14th Dalia Lama for this
>>> prize.
>>>
>>>   Does anything in this post contain information
>>> that might conflict with our societies social immune
>>> system? If so you might try writing a letter to the
>>> Editor of the Time's science page very soon!.
>>>   An unedited video of the reported on proceedings
>>> will be posted on the web at tsntv.org
>>>
>>>   If this subject interests anyone they should
>>> examine the source: page D1 of Nov. 21, 2006 of the
>>> N. Y. Times...the newspaper.
>>>
>>>   "Mary Poppins" Robbie
>>>
>>> craigerb at comcast.net wrote:
>>>   [gav]
>>> > the labour of the workers generates the wealth of
>>> the 'owner' class.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------
>>> Sponsored Link
>>>
>>> Degrees for employed people - in as fast as 1 year.
>>> A.S. / Bachelors / Masters
>>> 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/
>>>
>>
>>
>> Send instant messages to your online friends 
>> http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
>> 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/
>>
>> 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/
>>
>
>
> 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/
>
> 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/
>

More information about the Moq_Discuss mailing list