On 12 Jul 2012, at 22:29, John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Craig Weinberg
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Then we should stop teaching Newtonian physics as well, since
there are no new advances there either.
Not so. A hurricane simulation is pure Newtonian physics and yet
they are far far better now, that is to say they give us better
understanding of the storm, than they were 10 years ago or even 5.
Theology on the other hand was no good for anything 400 years ago
and it's no good for anything today.
> How about 'Anything that I deem unimportant should be
eliminated.'? Do you detect any flaw in that reasoning?
No, if I feel something is unimportant I generally also feel it
would be wiser not to do it and make better use of my time doing
something else.
If you believe in physics you are physical-realist, but if you believe
that physics is the fundamental science, then you are doing theology,
and you are presenting a science as a theology without making that
clear, which is exactly the error which has give theology its local
bad name.
Or you are just not interested in fundamental questions.
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
