Re: MD Science vs. Theism: Where's The Beef?

From: Mark Steven Heyman (
Date: Thu May 05 2005 - 06:18:31 BST

  • Next message: "Re: MD Primary Reality"

    Hi all,

    Ant quotes from Ian's blog:

    "Oh my god, this is truly awful. The logical positivist memeplex
    reinforces the religious memeplex. Science has unwittingly been it's
    own worst enemy."

    msh says:
    Although I know Ian prefers physics to religion for pure explanatory
    power, this quotation is to me a great example of how, by using
    exotic terminology, someone might, to an ear less skeptical than
    mine, come across as being profound when all they are being is at
    best provincial, at worst obscure. The quote seems to suggest that
    LP and religion are equally useful systems of investigation, that
    science has been caught in its own lie and is hoist by its own
    petard. This obvious falsehood is given an aura of truth by the use
    of the sophisticated sounding "memeplex." Must I really run to
    Dawkins in order to understand a sentence that, with slightly more
    effort, could have been written using plain ol' English?

    Apropos to this thread, there is a huge difference between the
    epistemological foundations of science and religion, and to suggest
    otherwise is, as I like to say, pure confusion.

    Just my fiftieth of a dollar, and I don't expect any money back.

    Mark Steven Heyman (msh)
    InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors
    Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983
    Web Site:

    "Tiger got to hunt, bird got to fly; Man got to sit and wonder 'why, why,
    why?' Tiger got to sleep, bird got to land; Man got to tell himself he
    understand." - Kurt Vonnegut, Cat's Cradle

    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 : Thu May 05 2005 - 06:18:49 BST