--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" <compost1uk@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" > <fintlewoodlewix@> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" > <compost1uk@> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" > <fintlewoodlewix@> wrote: > > > > > > > > If you want to have a go at convincing us go ahead. > Start wherever you like on the diagram. > > > > > > There are many things I don't believe in. Maybe I "don't > > > believe" in more than you (take "Scientism" for a start). > > > > Scientism? Ah yes, that weird sickness creationists like to > > accuse the rational of suffering from. > > Ah, "the rational". > http://youtu.be/cAgAvnvXF9U > > Is this your thought process? > > :: Creationists make accusations of scientism. > :: Creationists talk bollocks > :: This is an accusation of scientism > :: So this is bollocks > > Hardly an advertisement for the rational higher ground? > > Susan Haack: Six Signs Of Scientism: > ------------------------------------ > > 1. Using the words "science," "scientific," "scientifically," > "scientist," etc., honorifically, as generic terms of > epistemic praise. > > 2. Adopting the manners, the trappings, the technical > terminology, etc., of the sciences, irrespective of their real > usefulness. > > 3. A preoccupation with demarcation, i.e., with drawing a > sharp line between genuine science, the real thing, and > "pseudo-scientific" imposters. > > 4. A corresponding preoccupation with identifying the > "scientific method," presumed to explain how the sciences have > been so successful. > > 5. Looking to the sciences for answers to questions beyond > their scope. > > 6. Denying or denigrating the legitimacy or the worth of other > kinds of inquiry besides the scientific, or the value of human > activities other than inquiry, such as poetry or art.
Is this what you are accusing me of? Ho ho, does she think poetry can prove reincarnation?
