[MD] Debate on Science_ReligionToday

[Case]

[David M]
You really need to challenge yourself a bit more.

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

[Case]
As I said I listen to a lot of stuff. I absorb hard books more readily by
listening to them. I know my own habits and preferences pretty well.

[David M]
The problem is that SOM leaves us without hope, you're problem is lack of
hope too perhaps.

[Case]
Nothing leaves you without hope for long because no one lasts long without
it.

[David M]
A science only perspective is all SQ and no DQ and no projects worth getting
up for in the morning. 

[Case]
I could not possible disagree more. I get up every day hoping to learn more.
To see new relationships to gain a fuller appreciation for the elegance of
how things work. 

But any-kind-of-only perspective would be boring. Science is in some sense a
quest of objectivity, I suppose. But an interesting way to understand
objectivity is not as a search for understanding from a particular point but
for understanding regardless of point of view. Science invites multiple
points of view but it endorses only those that survive rigorous tests of
their worth.

[David M]
The reduction of living to functioning brought about by our authoritarian
and conformist societies adds to this as well don't you think?

[Case]
Most of the authoritarian stuff I see is minor and mostly of recent origin.
Searches at airports for example. Conformity results from clever application
of behavioral principles, advertising, entertainment media, rules in the
work place, local customs. 

[David M]
The space project was a good example of a possible genuine and communal
project.

[Case]
Yes and there was always international interest and participation. It was
one of the few things that generated joint effort by the US and USSR during
the Cold War. The Apollo-Soyuz missions were among the last for NASA after
the moon landings and before the Shuttle.