>DMB says:
The Enlightenment is utterly hostile to mysticism. Science and
>religion have been at odds ever since. Which, incidentally, is why I
thought
>your first response was funny. Because they're so opposite.
>
ERIN: MOQ "fixes" this remember?
DMB answers:
Yea, I think so. I think the MOQ reconciles science and mysticism. But my
original post about the failure of the enlightenment is more specifically
aimed at its' excessive rationality and dismissal of static social level
values. This is what leads to a metaphysics of substance, amoral scientific
objectivity and all the various reactionary movements that reject it by
returning to superstitions and traditions in a unthinking way. I hoped to
shed some light on the social/intellectual conflict for Elliot and others
who'd been grappling with it. I thought it was also an interesting idea that
even a movement like deconstructionism is a reaction to this same failure.
I'd add that 19th century romanticism is also a reaction to the
hyper-rationality of the Enlightenment. Fascism and fundamentalism, New-Age
movements and rampant materialism can be traced to this mistake too. Its an
area rich for discussion. Don't get me wrong, mysticism is one of my
favorite topics, but this failure to include third level values in our
intellectual formulations is fascinating and helps to explain so many of the
practicle issues of our time. Care to discuss it?
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 - 16:02:16 BST