From: Dan Fabulich (dfab@cinenet.net)
Date: Tue Jan 21 1997 - 19:02:51 MST
Lee Daniel Crocker wrote:
> It is a common criticism of reason by its enemies that it is just
> another dogma. But they're wrong. They are identifying one feature
> that the two share, i.e. "strongly held belief", and thereby equating
> them, which conveniently ignores the other feature of dogma that is
> just as critical to its definition: closed to criticism.
That's not always the case. Many rational people are open to rational
criticism, but remain closed to emotional or unsupported propositions.
That closes rationalism off from non-rational criticism, making it
effectively dogma.
To try and remain open-minded, one can adopt a pancritical rationalism,
(take a look at http://www.c2.org/~exi/pcr.htm ), but that system can
only take us so far. There are important questions which pancritical
rationalism leaves unanswered. Most notably, pancritical rationalism
leaves quite a bit of room for religion to thrive, so long as the
religion's concept of spirituality is internally consistent.
Nonetheless, it's an important start.
-He who laughs last thinks slowest-
dAN
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:44:02 MST