[FoRK] Re: Anything to be learned from religion?
Fri Aug 12 12:21:43 PDT 2005
Stephen D. Williams wrote:
> I think your argument is deep into semantic absolutism. [...] This
> model seems more true than any other.
This, then, would be the crux of science - what we currently have may
not be a perfect understanding of things but it is, by far, the best we
have /ever/ had. The predictive power of the current model is
astonishing inasmuch as it allows a great many wonderous things.
Religion, by comparison, doesn't even come close in this regard.
So, yes, science may not have it right, but it is a lot closer to 'the
truth' than you will get by reading (any of) the good book(s). What's
more, the scientific process allows for self-correction, although it has
been said that scientific revolution happens not so much by convincing
others that you are right, as by the old guard dying off and taking
their (mis)convictions with them. Perhaps we can look to this model of
scientific progress for an answer on the question of how to deal with
religious zealotry - don't, just let them die off and take their
religion with them. :-)
Seriously though, the country really needs to prevent the zealots from
taking over the government and institutionalizing their beliefs. In this
regard, however, there will be a long uphill battle to undo the damage
that has already been done. . . Thankfully we have a not so secret
weapon called REALITY on our side - let them talk all they want, but
it's damned hard to construct any semblance of a convincing arguement
against widely accepted facts like, oh, the earth being round and
orbiting the sun, germ theory, genetics, etc. That the majority of the
world is laughing over the debate of whether to include intelligent
design in the science curriculum seems to have been lost on most people.
More information about the FoRK