With respect to your scientist friend - science is not strictly speaking
capable of 'proving' at all. It is a method of 'destruct testing' by
rigorously applying logic to the attempt to DIS-prove. Thus, any theory
which has hitherto withstood this disproving onslaught is considered only
proved in that sense, and is hence the best theory on that subject TO DATE.
Thus, science has the nature of an ongoing enquiry which can never really be
concluded.
Refer your friend to Karl Popper's " A world of propensities".
I think your pessimism is unnecessary; the idea that there are only
molecules, (or whatever smallest aprticle you light on) was expressed some
2.5 thousand years ago by Democritus ;"there are only atoms and the void";
deep down, people will never subscribe to that view as a cosmology!
In fact, the 'good' scientists I know of are entirely motivated by a sense
of wonder, and for them, this increases over time rather than the opposite.
Does for me too. The idea that we could one day sit around and say "
there! - that's just about everything understood; nothing else to do, now"
would fill me with horror if it were'nt so comically unlikely. The journey
IS the destination. Anybody who tells you different is just depressed, and
wants you to be too!
cheers,
ppl
----- Original Message -----
From: <Ascmjk@aol.com>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: 19 March 2000 01:05
Subject: Re: MD complete silence!
> Jon here. I was formerly a poster under the screen name of "Cntryforce".
>
> These trends are interesting. Why does everyone start posting at once, and
> why does everyone stop posting at once? Coincidence, or...?
>
> Where has everyone gone? What happened to Dennis and Struan?
>
> I can only speak for myself. There are times when Pirsig's work interests
me
> a great deal. Then I become interested in something else, and several
weeks
> may go by before the nagging tug of RP's philosophy compels me to analyze
his
> works once again.
>
> Lately the aspect of LILA that I've been pondering is the portion where
> Pirsig explains that the intellectual level didn't take precedence until
> 1911. Hmm. If he is correct, then it seems logical to assume we haven't
yet
> seen the lasting ramifications of this event. Ninety years isn't much
data.
> But there may be enough clues to piece together some kind of preview. The
> future looks not so great.
>
> I've had some troubling debates with a few scientists recently. One in
> particular, whom Pirsig would almost certainly label a logical positivist.
A
> type of person who absolutely refuses to believe that there is *any*
aspect
> of reality that can't be detected by science. If science can't prove it's
> real, then it's not real. Period.
>
> This is a disturbing attitude that I see reflected in society. Record
numbers
> of people are rejecting religion. Science to many people, whether they
> understand science or not, is becoming a kind of God. Science, they think,
is
> real. God is not real. Only science is real.
>
> I have no problem with atheists, or anyone who wants to reject religion.
It's
> the attitudes of these people I find frightening. To them, the only stuff
> that is real is stuff that can be proven to exist. Everything else is
> fantasy. Human invention. Needless. Such as God. God, they say, is simply
not
> real. Why? His existence can't be proven. Fine. But here's where things
get
> complicated...
>
> What about Good? No, not God. Add an "o". Good. G-o-o-d.
>
> Does Good exist? Can Good be proven to exist? No, the logical positivists
> will answer. It's just a human invention (such as science, I would add).
>
> So, Good does not exist. Good, of course, is synonymous with Quality. So
> Quality doesn't exist either. And you can cross Morals and Morality off
the
> list of things that really exist. All pesky human fantasies. Human beings
> don't even exist, if you want to know the truth. We're just carbon and
> chemicals and electrons. No, we're not even that. We're just molecules.
>
> See the disastrous results of subject-object metaphysics at work? It's
> getting to the point where we don't even view ourselves as humans anymore.
We
> shouldn't think of ourselves this way. A brain, liver, lungs, intestines;
all
> parts that add up to a whole human. We get off track when we start
thinking
> of ourselves as what we can be broken down into, such as electrons and
> molecules. Throw a brain on a sidewalk and it's not very useful. We are
> losing touch with our very humanity.
>
> And what's more disturbing than anything else, is that many of the
scientists
> of the world think there's absolutely nothing wrong with losing touch with
> our humanity. To many of them, humanity just gets in the way with all its
> pesky biological and emotional needs. One day we will "free ourselves"
from
> our humanity, they say. Does this bother anyone else? I personally love
> humanity, despite its violent history. I certainly never want to free
myself
> from my humanity. But this seems to be one of the ultimate goals of
science,
> does it not?
>
> Science seems to be slowly turning us all into passive observers. After
all,
> nothing serves science better than passive observers. We are a long way
from
> becoming total slaves to science, but we are getting there. Generation
after
> generation becomes conditioned to observing by watching thousands of hours
of
> television and staring into computer screens every day. Anyone ever see
> "Metropolis"? I think it may actually offer a more accurate prediction of
the
> eventual future than "1984". Big Brother is a red herring.
>
> Customer parking only.
>
> If I had to pick three words to describe the near future of American
society,
> those would be the words. Customer parking only. If I had to pick one
word,
> it would be:
>
> Consolidation.
>
> I just wish more people would see this one simple fact. When people are
> comfortable, they don't realize there's a problem. So they don't attempt
to
> make any real changes. Pirsig is right about everything being an analogy.
If
> you are comfortable in the position you are currently in, chances are you
> will not change positions. Same with modern day society.
>
> We are becoming complacent, willing supplicants to the "reality" of
science.
> There is more to life than what can be proven. But this is a society that
is
> slowly, generation after generation, draining our capacity for wonder
away.
> What good is wonder in a universe where everything can be "explained" and
> "proven" by holy science?
>
> It's good to be back.
>
> Jon
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:40 BST