Krimel replied: The religious right bashes evolution and scientific materialism (they call is scientific naturalism) in much the same way and for the same reasons Wilber does.
dmb says: Okay, they share a common enemy. I'll give you that much but its hard to believe that you're being serious. I mean, according to your "logic", American feminism and Islamic fundamentalism must be the same thing because they're both opposed to pornography. American christian fundamentalists and I share a common enemy too. We're both opposed to Islamic fundamentalism. But, oh, what a difference. They are opposed to the Islamic part and I'm opposed to the fundamentalist part. And when it comes to being opposed to fundamentalism I really don't care what kind it is. In the case of materialistic theories of evolution, the religious right is opposed to it because it excludes their mythic god. I think they tend to use rational skepticism disingenuously. They criticize it in order to defend pre-rational beliefs about a creator. Wilber uses it to enhance evolutionary theory. There is no other way to say it. Equating the two is just dumb. [Krimel] Oh, I definitely think this a case of the enemy of my enemy is a friend. But note that feminists to the extent that they oppose porn do so for completely different reasons and on completely different grounds from Islamic fundamentalists. You say Christian fundamentalists "use rational skepticism disingenuously" while Wilber seeks to "enhance evolutionary theory". Who is not being serious here? Wilber uses the same logic and for the same purpose. Wilber rejects evolutionary theory just like the fundamentalists. He agrees for an immaterial Spirit or conscious purpose in the universe, just like the fundamentalist. Dave, he looks like a duck, he quacks like a duck... 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/
