dmb says: I suppose there is no fast or easy solution. But it sure seems like the social-intellectual distinction and the diagnosis it affords really could help to sort things out. I'm talking about the solution to the culture wars, but it could sort out the issues in this conversation about it too. I mean, which of the standard claims of christian faith, for example, would survive the demands of radical empiricism? In the contest between creationism and any normal science textbook which represents intellectual values and empirical standards? There will always be hard cases to ponder but most of these so-called debates aren't even debatable.
Ron: Hello Dmb, I have really enjoyed your last several posts. I don't think much of Christian faith would stand up to radical empiricism for the very reason That Christian faith, Catholicism in particular tend to take an excluded Middle approach to the subject. Recently I had a discussion with someone of the catholic faith as to why He felt intellectuals do not subscribe. He cited that intellectuals do Not want to be told they are wrong, that they refute it on the basis that Christian morals cramp their lifestyle and they justify their intellectual Beliefs on that. I said not so in my case. I do not subscribe because I feel the logic it employs is faulty. The absolute nature of the beliefs. The concept that it holds that there is one and only one truth, their truth. He said that truth is the word of God. I said no, that truth is the word of men and the conversation digressed from there. Your right on the money With the assessment that the church is the very edifice of SOM. We have a long row to hoe in the face of the logic of absolute universals. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
