RE: MD On Faith

From: David Buchanan (
Date: Mon Oct 25 2004 - 00:08:08 BST

  • Next message: Scott Roberts: "RE: MD On Faith"

    David Morey said:
    You US guys are defending reason against some pretty backward looking
    religion in the US context. I understand this and you sure need to. Us UK
    folks are in a completely different context.

    dmb says:
    Its true that the USA is the most religious nation in the West, and nearly
    half of the population could rightly be described as fundamentalists. But
    this is about culture, demographics and politics, not philosophy, which is
    what were talking about here. Epistemological pluralism and all that,

    David Morey cont:
    In the UK religion has almost always embraced science and rationalism.
    Most of our early naturalists were church men. And even now for example
    John Polkinghorne is a physicist and Anglican minister. So we do not have
    your problems. In our context I would say that if anything our best
    religious thinking asks the question if their is more to experience than
    what the
    scientific tradition offers, it is expanding the common inertia to thinking
    rather than limiting thinking. Thanks for your conflicts but they are your

    dmb says:
    Oh, please. Nietzsche announced the death of god. Darwin wrote the Origin of
    Species. William Blake was a tea-sipper like you. Voltaire bitch-slapped
    religion every day of his life. There weren't too many famous Existentialist
    in America after the war, it was very European thing. I mean, if you think
    the conflict between science and religion is resolved in your part of the
    Western world, then I can only conclude that you're unfamiliar with the
    issues I refer to. Most of our early naturalist were churchmen too, by the
    way. In fact, until the 20th century it was mighty difficult to earn a
    college degree in any subject without studying theology too. This was the
    Victorian world described at length in Lila and its no accident that said
    culture was named after YOUR Queen.

    In any case, I wonder if you'd like to get specific and actually make a
    case. Why not do some high-quality god-talking? Why not bring me some
    samples of the "best religious thinking", the kind that's "expanding the
    common inertia"? (I wonder what that means.) Have I not been specific and
    clear, provided supporting quotes, explanatory quotes, examples,
    explanations and such? Go ahead. Make the case. I'll read every word. Show
    me what's in your hand, dude. This is a discussion group, not a poker game.

    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Oct 25 2004 - 00:43:31 BST