Bruno said

> For me, all questioning is amenable to science, or put in another
> way, we can kept a scientific attitude, in all fields, including
> asking for faith.

Fair enough, as long as we all know what a 'scientific attitude' is.
Kuhn, Popper, Wittgenstein, Derrida ???

> Correct machines can tapped into a truth that transcends machines
> reason, but not into a truth that "contradicts" machines reason.
> Unless the machine suffers from some bad faith. The same for humans;
> scientist or believer alike. In the (ex) Soviet Union, Lyssenko has
> defended a crazy biology contradicting more and more the evidences,
> leading to one of the worst famine.

So basically machines are a 'good idea'. But a different idea this
century to last century or the one before.

> The problem is that as long as we discourage rationalist to study
> theology and doing research in theology, we are abandoning it to the
> "irrationalists" or to the dishonest people, like those who will use
> some natural human fears to manipulate people and get power.

The most annoying example of this is creationism. I think USA has
now been led to great clashes over 'creationism', which most
scientists do not see as scientific at all..They see, probably
correctly, creationism to be a threat, not part of a dialogue. In fact
the point where they would rather creationism did not exist.
Enthusiasm can thus bring problems. But Americans are basically
at heart enthusiasts and Babbits, to generalise. The old Krio saying
is "dog na dog". (Americans or dogs will remain as Americans (or
dogs)). I only use USA as an example, the Middle East is far worse.

> There is no contradiction in the existence of a 100% scientific
> theology, still  letting the religious attitudes to any personal
> individual choice (example the yes/no doctor attitude in the comp
> framework).

But scientists take the view that creationism and the like are not
science. There are not so much contradictions but basic
problems. Scientific theology would be a lot of fun. But a detailed
theology (and by detailed I mean roughly 'at least one book') is
always tainted with dogma or has been so far AFAIK.

Latest Headlines: "Two more die over cartoons in Lahore"
"Paris Hilton to be Mother Teresa in new film". Tub
thumping attitudes like this do not suggest that anyone will
compromise effectively.


Reply via email to