 | | Re: Science is not a religion, and religion is not a science.
|
| (...) I still don't agree; the true beauty of science is that even the scientific method itself isn't immutable. If a better, more complete system comes along, science as a discipline will embrace it. If one says "I have faith in the scientific (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Science is not a religion, and religion is not a science.
|
| (...) Nevertheless, it IS what I was aiming at-- we do have faith when we see a coke can that it exists. The question is whether that existence is (as Ponty might say) an existence in itself or an existence as we see it. Basically, defining that (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Science is not a religion, and religion is not a science.
|
| (...) I'll see your Ponty and raise you some PK Dick; reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. Okay, that's not a conclusive answer, but it entertains me. Once again I think the essence in our difference lies in how we (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Science is not a religion, and religion is not a science.
|
| (...) I think that while I agree with that, I'll point out the clarification I'd make (more Ponty, actually, IIRC). Reality is, in *whole* or in *part*, that which is unignorable-- I.E. that which doesn't go away without you believing in it, as you (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Science is not a religion, and religion is not a science.
|
| (...) This, too, is Postmodernism, and it depends on a solipsistic "me first" sort of reality. Certainly the caveman is dead, and that should be enough for him, but the agent of his death is separate from his perception of it. It is a handgun (or (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Science is not a religion, and religion is not a science.
|
| (...) Exactly! The question arising forthwith, though, is whether we should go about saying what reality is. Should we say 'God does not exist.'? No. We should say 'God does not exist in MY reality.' The distinction should be made. And as I imply (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
