From: Michael M. Butler (butler@comp-lib.org)
Date: Wed Dec 22 1999 - 21:37:12 MST
>Point taken. I agree this is not the appropriate forum. It is a shame
>that religious discussions have become taboo in public. This seems to
>further the seperation of science from religion. Censorship through
>fanatical intimidation.
I delight in the question-begging symmetry of the last sentence. But I must
take issue with your use of the word "censorship". The phrase "Fanatical
intimidation", taken alone, covers the general chilling effect pretty well.
And it crops up lots of places. Singleminded steadfastness shares a border
with it. "Most people think [that] they are thinking when they are merely
rearranging their prejudices."
As Scott Adams points out, everyone is an idiot. It's generally accepted
that being an idiot all the time is worse than being an idiot just some of
the time. A hard part is figuring out what (or whose) criteria to use for
idiocy.
Is it idiotic to claim that what look like two-million-old human footprints
present a mystery? Evidently, because scientismists state bluntly that they
are just footprints from a dinosaur (which species, pray?) that folded its
feet when it ran, and creationists, well, who cares what they say, right?
Everyone presses for an answer, and "perhaps" gets clipped out of the frame.
Zeteticism is always in short supply, along with humility. I do not exclude
myself. But I'm working on it.
MMB
Humans love closure; we seem to be designed that way. And, no, mister
pince-nez, "design" does not imply a creator, _nor does it not_.
"Design" is, among other things, what humans grok as "pattern". Period.
Stop beating that gooey spot where the horse used to be.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:06:11 MST