Jim wrote... I don't know how long you've been around here, but as much as I respect the intellectuals that make this list so great, I have endured a number of anti-religious remarks over the years.
Very few here seem to want to allow "divine intervention" as a POSSIBLE causal variable. Aubyn writes... Thanks for the rest of your recent response, which I have snipped from the above. What I have re-posted seems to get to the core of the matter though. To the extent that psychology is the scientific study of thinking feeling and behaving (certainly there is some debate about that), and to the extent that this list discusses issues related to the teaching of that scientific study, then I don't see how "divine intervention" can be allowed as a possible causal variable. Science is limited to natural explanations, divine intervention is a supernatural explanation. There are those who dispute the assumption that psychology should be a scientific study, and perhaps you want to make that case - I would be interested in hearing it. But what I have noticed (or think I have noticed) in your posts is a desire to have things both ways; to have psychology be both a scientific study *and* to have that scientific study somehow support possible divine or supernatural explanations. That strikes me as incoherent. **************************************************** Aubyn Fulton, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology Chair, Behavioral Science Department Pacific Union College Angwin, CA 94508 Office: 707-965-6536 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***************************************************** --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
