RE: MD On Faith

From: Scott Roberts (jse885@earthlink.net)
Date: Thu Oct 07 2004 - 03:34:45 BST

  • Next message: Scott Roberts: "Re: MD Read & SQ & Coherence"

    Platt et al,

    [Scott:]> > Note that Chuck said "scientism" is coherent, while Dawkins is
    talking
    > > about science. Dawkins is correct that science is not a faith. Scientism
    > > is, however. Science is a way to learn things about the inorganic world.
    > > Scientism is a belief that science is the only way to know anything.
    >
    > According to Merriam Webster Online Dictionary, scientism "1.methods and
    > attitudes typical of or attributed to the natural scientist." Note
    > "typical of" which suggests that many scientists consider themselves the
    > shamans of the modern age, Dawkins being a prime example. As for faith,
    my
    > previous two posts in this thread which remain unchallenged cited the
    many
    > assumptions that scientists accept on faith without question. To Dawkins
    > and his fellow SOM materialists, science is indeed a religion, defined as
    > "4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and
    > faith."

    Then I should have used the more explicit name 'scientific materialism'
    instead of 'scientism'. My apologies, though I have often seen the two
    terms ('scientism' and 'scientific materialism') used interchangeably. With
    that substitution, I did challenge your first post. Science is an activity,
    not a doctrine or metaphysics or faith. Some scientists (like Dawkins) are
    scientific materialists, but many others are Christians, Muslims,
    agnostics, etc. who do not hold that evolution proceeds by blind chance,
    etc.

    >
    > (Scott)
    > > As for killing, zealots and bigots kill for their beliefs, whether those
    > > beliefs are religious or not. The problem is zealotry and bigotry, not
    > > religion.
    >
    > To suggest all killing can be attributed to zealots and bigots isn't
    > realistic. Societies rightfully kill biological patterns that threaten
    > their existence, like germs and terrorists, in self-defense.

    I didn't suggest that all killing can be attributed to zealots and bigots.
    Read it again.

    To suggest that terrorism is a biological pattern is wrong. Biological
    beings kill for food or self-defense. Terrorists kill for social reasons.

    - Scott

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    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 2.1.5 : Thu Oct 07 2004 - 03:37:51 BST