I watched the Daily Show and was looking forward to their guest: “<Somebody-Something> discusses faith in Science”.
“Oooo,” I thought.
Oh, yes. I was really shocked seeing Jon agree to her about how science could learn a lot from religion.
Now if religion meshed with the best of philosophy, shed itself of outdated beliefs and took the time to understand and accept science THEN we might have something….
I agree with her view on using best insights from both systems. The reason is simply about pragmatics. I think that was the point.
What’s not clear here is the role of axiomatic models in both systems. Both systems use axioms to explain the nature of life. And, in order to ‘make use of’ anything one must have a starting point – a truth that is taken for granted. In one of these systems, the axioms are usually given and haven’t been replaced since they were declared. In the other system, they are subject to be replaced by better axioms with new findings. I think that is the fundamental difference from a philosophical view point, as opposed to sitting at home and debating about what’s “real” and what’s not.
So, IMHO, which system(s) one subscribes to is merely about choice and practical use.
I wrote more about this in detail at http://csarven.ca/systems-and-choices . Nothing mind blowing new.
[BTW, I do enjoy your comic strips quite a bit. However, sometimes I do find the information misleading, if not dishonest e.g., this post. I guess that's a trade off for the sake of friendly humor.]
Yeah, and the computer you use can be powered by prayer. Just pull out the power cord while you’re praying.
Over 2000 years and still waiting for some truth to come out of religion … It’s really hard though, especially when you consider the stories are all wrong – the bible claims that whales are fishes!
Ape, not monkey
is powered by WordPress with ComicPress.
Subscribe RSS: Entries | Comments
Copyright 2009 Jeffrey Weston