Hi Stephen P. King
I agree. And would add that structurally liberalism is fascist.
Mainly in government control and control of beliefs.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/7/2013
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Woody Allen
----- Receiving the following content -----
From: Stephen P. King
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-06, 16:33:52
Subject: Re: From nominalism to Scientifc Materialism Re: Is Sheldrakecredible?
Ipersonally think so.
On 1/6/2013 3:49 PM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King
The word "must" implies forcible persuasion.
Hi,
But the use of force to persuade is not the essence of fascism. Fascism is
a governing system where the population can own property privately but the use
of said property is dictated by the State. Most countries are fascistic.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
1/6/2013
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Woody Allen
----- Receiving the following content -----
From: Stephen P. King
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-06, 14:08:54
Subject: Re: From nominalism to Scientifc Materialism Re: Is Sheldrake
credible? Ipersonally think so.
On 1/6/2013 8:39 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
> Hi Alberto G. Corona
>
> Sounds like fascism to me.
How so?
>
>
> [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
> 1/6/2013
> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." - Woody Allen
> ----- Receiving the following content -----
> From: Alberto G. Corona
> Receiver: everything-list
> Time: 2013-01-06, 06:56:37
> Subject: From nominalism to Scientifc Materialism Re: Is Sheldrake credible ?
> Ipersonally think so.
>
>
> A greath truth. Every human knowledge has also social consequiences. When I
> say "A". I don? only say "A is true". I say also that because A is true and
> you must accept it because a set of my socially reputated fellows of me did
> something to affirm it, you must believe it, and, more important, I deserve a
> superior status than you, the reluctant.
>
>
> As a consequence of this fact o human nature (which has a root in natural
> selection). every corpus of accepted knowledge is associated from the
> beginning to a chiurch of guardians of ortodoxy. No matter the intentions or
> the objectivity or the asepsy of the methods of the founders. There is a
> power to keep, much to gain and loose, and as time goes on, real truth
> becomes a secondary question. ?he creatie, syncere founders are substituted
> by media polemizers and mediocre defenders of the status quio.
>
>
> This power-truth tension in science was biased heavily towards the former
> when State nationalized science at the end of the XIX century, because
> science was standardized and homogeneized to the minimum common denominator,
> chopping any heterodoxy, destroying free enquiry which was vital for the
> advancement. Now peer reviews are ?n many sofft disciplines, filters of
> ortodoxy, not quality controls. ?
>
>
> As the philosopher of science Feyerabend said, It is necessary a separation
> of State and science as much as was necessary a separartion of State and
> church: Because a state with a unique church of science is a danger for
> freedom, and because a science dominated by the state is a danger for any
> science.
>
>
> The standardization of science towards materiamism was a logical consequence
> of ?he a philosophical stance of protestantism: the Nominalism, that rejected
> the greek philosophical legacy and separated dratically the revelated
> knowledge of the Bible form the knowledge of the things of the world without
> the bridge of greek philosophy. Mind-soul and matter became two separate
> realms. Common sense or the Nous were not a matter of science and reason,
> like in the greek philosophy (what is reasonable included what makes common
> sense, just like it is now in common parlancy), but a matter of the
> individual spirit under the firm umbrela of the biblical revelation. The
> problem is that this umbrela progressively dissapeared, and with it, common
> sense. That gave a nihilistic relativism as a consequience. With the
> exception of USA, where common sense is still supported by the faith.
>
>
> ?he other cause were the wars of religion among christian denominations, that
> endend up in a agreement of separation between church and state, where any
> conflictive view was relegated to religion as faith, and only the minimum
> common denominator was admitted as a foundation for politics, This MCD was a
> form of political religion. This political religion was teist at the
> beginning (As is not in USA) laater deist and now is materialist, following a
> path of progressive reduction to accomodate the progressive secularization
> (which indeed was a logical consequence of the nominalism and the
> proliferation of faiths that the reform gave birth).
>
>
> In later stages, the political religion has dropped the country history, and
> even reversed it, and, following its inexorable logic, try to destroy
> national identity of each individual european country, in the effort to
> accomodate the incoming inmigration worldviews. This is in part, no matter
> how shockig is, the logical evolution of the agreement that ended the
> religious wars of the XVI century.
>
> In the teistic and deistic stages the State made use of the transcendence in
> one form or another for his legitimacy, since the divine has a plan, and
> people belive in the divine, the legitimacy of the state, in the hearths fo
> the people, becomes real when the nation-state is inserted in this divine
> plan.
>
>
> When, to accomodate the materialistic sects, marxists among them, the ?tate
> took over Science to legitimate itself, because the State no longer had the
> transcendence as an option to suppor his legitimacy. the legitimacy of the
> state was supported by a materialistic sciece, subsidized, controlled and
> depurated from any heterodoxy.?
>
>
> So there is the current science, an image of the state political religion,
> Multicultural, relativistic and materialist.
>
>
>
>
--
Onward!
Stephen
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
