On Monday, January 21, 2013 11:53:07 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote:
> Science had to fight every inch of the way against theology and > theologians and the fight still isn't over. That is a fiction of historical revisionism. Science is a kind of philosophy, philosophy is a refinement of theology. You will never find a civilization which has developed science without philosophy or philosophy without some kind of spiritual framework of cosmology. That's just the facts, man. The founders of Western Enlightenment science would be quite surprised to hear that their invention of science was a fight against theology as they were profoundly theological and philosophical in their orientation. It is only recently, as the limitations of the narrow Western approach are being revealed on a global scale, that science has fallen into a fundamentalist pathology which makes an enemy of teleology. > If you can't immediately figure out how something can be the way it is > theology advises you to just give up and say "God did it"; Now that we can give up and say "Evolution did it", things are much better, eh? > in other words theologians are intellectually lazy, but fortunately > scientists are not. Scientists are modern theologians. Theologians are pre-scientific scientists. > But they do have something in common, they both love mysteries. > Theologians love mysteries because they like to wallow in ignorance, > scientists love mysteries because it gives them something new to try to > figure out. A Manichean mythology of prejudice. What new mystery are you trying to figure out? > That's why particle physicists would be absolutely delighted if the LHC > produced something mysterious that contradicted something they thought they > knew and will be very disappointed if nothing like that shows up in one of > their detectors. Can you imagine a theologian being delighted to find > something that contradicted his faith? I can't. > You grandly overestimate the integrity of modern science. Can you imagine how many physicists there would be at the LHC if it paid the same as being a theologian? Can you imagine a scientist finding something that contradicted his potential for future paychecks? > > What is your theory? >> > > That theologians are so dumb they can't walk and chew gum at the same time. > Sounds like a well-founded scientific theory. "Whatever I dislike is the stupidest thing in the world." Craig > > John k Clark > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/tYht-35DYZkJ. To post to this group, send email to email@example.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.