[MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?)

[Ron Kulp]

"When the winds of change blow hard enough,
The most trivial of things can turn into deadly projectiles" 

-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of MarshaV
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 2:40 PM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?)

At 01:30 PM 1/19/2007, Ian wrote:

>[Arlo]
>What do you mean "would have been", I'd say "had been". But this just 
>underscores the two-faced agenda of the "intelligent design" crowd. I 
>have argued several times in our local school district for a 
>"comparative mythology"
>course. Each time, and I mean _each_ time, the suggestion is squelched 
>by _Christians_ who would hear NOTHING about any _other_ "God" 
>mentioned in school. It has been made clear to me, under no uncertain 
>terms, that any course that _lowers_ Christianity to a comparable 
>"myth" with other world mythologies would be rejected outright. These 
>are the same people who argue the next day for "intelligent design". 
>Now do you _really_ think these people want ID to be a metaphor? Do you

>really think they want the Tao taught in schools? Or the Buddha? Or the

>Norse account of creation? Or Goddess mythology?
>
>The day you can stand up in school and say "Christianity is a useful 
>metaphor to understand the human condition, and like other world 
>metaphors which we will examine as situated cultural analogies on par 
>with the Occidental mythologies, is useful only when one remembers 'all

>this is just an analogy', and one analogy among many, all of which 
>speak to parts of the human experience equally and with valid voice. 
>Buddha, Christ, Kuan Yin, White Buffalo Calf Woman (two male, two 
>female) are metaphors. Let's explore them.", I'll drop my condemnation 
>of the theist/ID crowd and support their cause.
>
>I truly believe Ian means well, and likely could indeed make a cogent 
>argument for "intelligent design" as an "anthropological metaphor" for 
>Quality. But this is not what the ID crowd wants, like others on this 
>board, they want complexity and diversity and beauty to be "proof" of a

>"God"... and from there its a short jaunt (as Mark implies, if I read 
>him correctly) to "my God". Would it be that the ID crowd were 
>interested in metaphor and art and analogy. Sadly, they are interested 
>in literal, theistic dogma to replace "science". That is the agenda.
>
>So I am cautious in between a crowd that sees "intelligent design" 
>as a means to
>bring literal Christianity into our schools as a plausible and equal 
>alternative to "reason", and a philosophy discussion group that uses 
>"intelligent design" as an "anthropological metaphor" to further our 
>understanding of the cosmos.

Hi Arlo,

I can still remember the day I threw my family bible in the garbage, and
piled on leftovers and coffee grounds.  It's such crap.

Bravo for trying to get a comparative mythology course.  Please keep
trying.

Marsha





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/