welcome to the cultural revolution (aka what the FUCK is wrong with the florida legislature?)

(maybe not but i think this is standard thomist catholicism) (if so it's not anti-science or anti-rationalism or anti-education, and it IS kinda circular but not in a way that's difft from the programme of education as we already understand it)

("you attacked reason," said father brown. "it's bad theology.")

The results of seeking Truth.

(I'm typing quickly because this is a fast moving thread)

saying: ‘Evolution is a fact. I don’t want to hear about Intelligent Design (a creationist theory), and if you don’t like it, there’s the door,’”

no, challenging one's beliefs is the best thing at moving towards Truth.

yes, but I am human and don't know the Truth.

but it's a VERY abstract analysis, bcz it insists on the existence of a "true knowledge" which possibly only god is aware of, which current human knowledge has deviated from: by "being christians", believers in the abstract align themselves with the true knowledge (bcz xtianity is defined BY DEFN as "true knowledge") though actually in reality none of them are necessarily AWARE of how current human knowledge is deivating in any particular, just a formal concept of how it PEROBABLY MIGHT BE (cz humans are usually wrong, unlike god)

the zizek-eagleton "concrete universal" isn't very difft from this idea (unsurprisingly, as both of em are catholics i think) (eagleton is: zizek i'm not so sure abt)

(i think it's a completely unnecessary add-on, as regards thinking abt thinking, but i don't consider "relativism" a problem: wrestling fact from the power politics of life is as hard now as it wz yesterday, 100 yearsd ago, or a thousand yearws ago)

That is a Christian point of view. There is a long Xtian tradition of science deduced from observing God's creation.

then why are so many bible-bangers such uneducated ignoramuses?!?

Not in Alabama. Believe me.

something I have infinitely more respect for than A Nairn's nonsensically circular bullshit.

this could be for many reasons, but probably because they too put religion/faith into the private sphere out of the public. And into the nonrational sphere out of the rational sphere.

the xtian pov that a.nairn is arguing is that academic study as we understand it provided everything is argued out PROPERLY and FULLY - is the xtian route to truth

he is arguing that professors saying "evolution is a FACT so we don't have to justify it any more" is bad science, hence not xtian

i think evolution is true, and i can see why professors are pissed off having to spend time having to RE-argue stuff they think they already proved BUT in realworld terms, they really DO have to re-argue it - so i think they shd get used to that, and get on with it

the fact that they are not taking the opposition seriously politically IS bad science (even if they're right not to take them seriously SCIENTIFICALLY)

bcz science exists in the world of funding and laws and ppl, NOT just in the intouchable thomist sphere

that's right - everything's a lesson. Including when your professors challenge you to support a belief that you can neither articulate, describe, or discuss evidence for. I think the lesson there is "think critically". which you aren't doing, and that being the case, I'd give you an F and show you the door as well.

replace mine above with "The Biblical Christian point of view"

haha - yeah I love thos Xtians who don't read the Bible! wtf.

heh. and as James Burke once said(in the last ep of Connections or The Day The Universe Changed), our idea of truth changes everytime we define a bit more of the universe.

xpost

there was always that line about how some advanced physicists see themselves as trying to find God. altho, this could be apocryphal. or the guy that used his noggin & some wire to build a little radio-telescope thing in his backyard, and somehow maps out the aftereffects of the Big Bang. He called in "The Footprint of God."