Re: MD Science, humanities and the quantum soul

From: Yale Landsberg (yale_landsberg@yalelands.com)
Date: Fri Sep 19 2003 - 16:43:32 BST

Next message: Scott R: "Re: MD Dealing with S/O"

Previous message: Ian Glendinning: "RE: MD science and the humanities - R M Young"
In reply to: Ian Glendinning: "MD Science, humanities and the quantum soul"
Next in thread: David MOREY: "Re: MD Science, humanities and the quantum soul"
Reply: David MOREY: "Re: MD Science, humanities and the quantum soul"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

<<The humanities are about discussing values and morals,
the sciences are about avoiding talk about morals and values.>>

That is true now, but definitely has not always been the case. In fact, before the "Enlightenment" science giants such as Newton, Kepler... saw a unification of science and pre-othodox religion which was whole and one. For example,

>From a Scholium of the Principia: "This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all; and on account of his dominion he is wont to be called Lord God or Universal Ruler;..."

and Kepler: "I yield freely to the sacred frenzy; I dare frankly to confess that I have stolen the golden vessels of the Egyptians to build a temple for my God far from the bounds of Egypt. If you pardon me, I shall rejoice; if you reproach me, I shall endure. The die is cast, and I am writing the book--to be read either now or by posterity, it matters not. It can wait a century for a reader, as God himself has waited six thousand years for a witness."

And thus an ancdote and a question... A friend of mine (who is a minister AND a programmer) said after a talk I gave at his science and religion discussion group on some of what is in http://theometry.org: "The First Enlightenment took God out of the equation, and since then Relativity has been popularly taken to mean that "everything is relative" -- even though Einstein was looking for and found what is absolute regardless of different frame of reference" He ended his summary with : "Many people, both religious or not, seem to be waiting for a way to put some kind of Absolutes back in."

Obviously, I agree. I wonder what Pirsig would think about that?

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Ian Glendinning
  To: moq_discuss@moq.org
  Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 7:46 AM
  Subject: MD Science, humanities and the quantum soul

Just by way of cross-linking threads (and at the risk of stating the obvious) duality is of course fundamental to quantum considerations too.
Ian Glendinning.

  PS Dawkins is very sceptical (nay scathing) of those who see a great convergence - but I fall for it every time.
    -----Original Message-----
    From: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk [mailto:owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk]On Behalf Of David MOREY
    Sent: 12 September 2003 21:00
    To: moq_discuss@moq.org
    Subject: MD science and the humanities

Hi all

    The humanities are about discussing values and morals,
    the sciences are about avoiding talk about morals and values.
    See link below to a discussion of this byRobert M Young.
    He suggests we need to take a look at the dualisms of:

humanities - science

society - science

culture - nature

qualitative - quantitative

value - fact

purpose - mechanism

subject - object

internal - external

secondary- primary (qualities)

thought - extension

mind - body

character - behaviour