<huge snip>
[James]So it makes little
sense, if we are going to take our beliefs on faith, to have more faith
in the authority of science than in the authority of religion or of our
parents. But what if we are no longer content to take our beliefs on
faith in anyone else's authority? How, then, do we go about deciding
what composes reality. Ultimately we cannot do better than to have
faith in our own authority, and base our beliefs on what makes the most
sense, and feels most deeply right, to us. Interestingly enough, this
was precisely the method advocated 350 years ago by a man who has been
called the father of modern science, French philosopher Rene Descartes.
[Kalkor]Very well said. But there's something you missed I think, and that
is:
...what makes the most sense, feels most deeply right to us, and has proven
itself most effective in achieving the desired result...
The scientific method, by definition, requires constant re-examination of
the effectiveness and accuracy of the method itself. Does this make more
sense than dogmatic ways of defining the world around you? Does it feel
deeply right, that a tool we use to put into symbols the world around us
also compels examining those symbols as rigorously as possible before
accepting them?
And I cannot deny its effectiveness... ;-}
Kalkor
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Sep 22 2002 - 05:06:14 MDT