Worth Re: [FoRK] Faith and/or Science - Newton et al

[Jeff Bone]

On Nov 28, 2007, at 7:24 PM, Luis Villa wrote:

> On Nov 28, 2007 8:11 PM, Jeff Bone <jbone at place.org> wrote:
>>>> Indeed it is, particularly given how ABOMINABLY BAD religion has
>>>> been, historically, at achieving that stated end ("shared meaning")
>>>> and how very precisely science-as-method is a means of achieving  
>>>> the
>>>> same thing far more reliably.
>>>
>>> Uh... meaning? Science does a lot of things, and I love science, but
>>> it is pretty bad at creating meaning.
>>
>> Too fine an interpretation of "meaning."
>>
>> Substitute "understanding."  Surely religion, in creating shared
>> meaning, must first create shared understanding?  Yet --- it fails
>> even at that prerequisite.
>
> Understanding is not a prerequisite for meaning. Meaning, in this
> context, means 'I *feel* like I'm doing it for a purpose' not 'I know
> or can explain what the purpose is.'

Ah, your understanding of the meaning of "meaning" was clearly not  
the same thing as my understanding of "meaning."

And there, in a nutshell, is the problem with this crap.  When you're  
this far off the rez, all bets are off.

jb