Hello Wim,
I was just curious as to why Quakers can't gamble? Also I was wondering if
you could expand on how your notion of progress is different from Rogers.
Specifically what is different about a religion/Meaning based view of progress
then a science/knowledge based veiw of progress? (is it a abstract/concrete
nature of progress that is being debated?)
All the ideas I have heard about progress have been good but it seems the only
crystal clear aspect is that indicative of health. Sometimes it seems to me
that knowledge/meaning are the means to health. You and Roger seem to differ
on the means but agree on the goal.
So if you could expand on why is religion necessary for health I would be
interested.
Erin
WIM: I'd bet on religion (rather than science) as a good starting point. (If
only I were allowed to bet... Being a Quaker I'm not (-;) Traditional
religious
ways of ascribing Meaning to everything have been eroded by the scientific
world view (in some religious movements more than for others..., among
Quakers especially so), but the notion that striving for Meaning goes beyond
striving for truth has stayed.
PROGRESS includes:
2) Progressive topics tend to be grounded in direct experience rather than
abstract.
5) I also see progress as being virtually synonymous with knowledge.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:58 BST