From: Scott Roberts (jse885@earthlink.net)
Date: Mon Oct 18 2004 - 23:06:06 BST
Jim,
> >>[somebodyorother-nooffencemeant:[DMB:]] In any case, I think the clash
between science and
> >>religion is resolved in the MOQ, even if its not easy to see at first.
> >[Scott:] It has been resolved for over a hundred years in liberal
Protestant
> >theology. The Catholics took longer, but they have no problem either,
since
> >Vatican II.
> jl in polite astonishment:
> Really????????
So now I have to guess what conflict you had in mind. If it is stem-cell
research (since that's in the news lately), that is a conflict over whether
it is moral for scientists to do such research. There will always be
questions over the morality of what scientists work on, cases of obvious
immorality (e.g., Mengele), and debatable ones (should scientists have
worked on the A-bomb, vivisection). But these are not conflicts where
science says X is true, but dogma says Y is true, as in the classic cases
of Galileo and evolution. It is this sort of thing that I assume Pirsig was
referring to ("Science supercedes old religious forms, not because what it
says is more true in any absolute sense (whatever that is), but because
what it says is more Dynamic." (LILA Chapter 17).
If it was something else, let me know.
- Scott
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Oct 18 2004 - 23:54:18 BST