The other day that Runamuck guy was so shocked and outraged because he had never heard of Thomas Kuhn. Today a know nothing sent a comment saying something stupid like "only whut has been proved by science is worth thinking or know'n about." I can just imagine what that little know nothing thinks science is about. So many of these atheists think that science is fool proof unquestionable window on absolute truth and they hide behind numbers and the mystique of science to protect them from the angry god they always secretly feel is watching.
The idea that science can tell us anything the foundations of reality is insanity. To be outraged because someone sees through the facade is quite telling. Why do you think they aren't really capable of living up their ideal as "free thinkers?" Free thinking is hardly flying into hysterics becomes someone wants to read metaphysics. What they really mean by science is not knowledge of the natural world gained by systematic observations but an ideology that protects them from the pang of conscience and conviction that stab at their hearts when the thought crosses their mind that they betrayed their parents their traditions their culture and redeemer.
At first the moderns wanted to be modern. They wanted to free themselves from duty and obligation and be unfettered in their screwing. The postmoderns opened the abyss to the bottomless pit of chaos and it scared the hell out of the scientsitic types because they realized that they needed God. Chaos is too relative. They can't turn to God they've thrown him away. They turn to their counter fit god science to save them.
True science is neutral. It's not a tool for destroying religion nor is it's real function a hiding place behind numbers. Their failure to appreciate the limits of science is quite revealing because it means they don't really think scientifically. Real scientific thinking is not a barrage of slogans and ploys designed to crush the self esteem of people who like philosophy. To truly think scientifically they would have to admit to the limits of science and not seek to impose science upon other domains. The atheist ideology of science seeks to impose itself on the most private of feelings. One dares not to believe what is in the heart, but one must crush the desires of the heart to obey the facts and numbers of science. It's totalizing it seeks to control. It tells us "you cannot believe in your heart. the heart is real, feelings are not real. One must believe only what science tells it.
Of course their devotion to real science is a falsehood which obvious when we look at how they treat real science. When they are confronted with science they do not know and science that supports any Christian position they immediately declare it "that's not real science." I don't refer to creationists. when I proved that a vast body of scientific work in psychology proves religious experience is real and valid and sets up the basis for a God argument, they declared all of psychology to be false and unscientific. They actually have no respect for science at all. Because they don't know or care about science. They have fashioned a god and church in the image of science.
4 comments:
Can you possibly make your point without the gratuitous atheist bashing?
I don't much feel like reading past the first line here when your stuff always start's off with comments about atheists being stupid know nothings or brownshirts. It's bad enough on "atheistwatch" but I thought this was a serious blog...
Can you possibly make your point without the gratuitous atheist bashing?
spoil sport
A Hermit --
Well, there you have your answer about this being a serious blog.
The problem is that Metacrock doesn't appear to understand the limits of philosophy, and thus confuses feelings with knowledge, and thus is free to believe that atheists equate science with religion, are unfettered in their screwing, betrayed their parents, and that Obama was born in Kenya. Oh, wait, that's the product of someone else's fantasy.
To be serious, Metacrock is correct to point out that too many atheists talk about science in far too reverential tones. But it is disrespectful to philosophy to generalize uncharitable non sequiturs from statements made from non-professionals who are coming from a context considerably different from his own. If he truly understood his Kuhn, he wouldn't be so rash.
But then, he is amusing.
Well, there you have your answer about this being a serious blog.
The problem is that Metacrock doesn't appear to understand the limits of philosophy, and thus confuses feelings with knowledge, and thus is free to believe that atheists equate science with religion, are unfettered in their screwing, betrayed their parents, and that Obama was born in Kenya. Oh, wait, that's the product of someone else's fantasy.
Atheists on carm want to limit to limit philosophy to a pile a crap. Is that what you are saying? Whenever you get down to one form of knowledge and method of knowing and everything other than your views are crap then you are an ideologue as well as an idiot.
Your little foolish implication that I"m not for Obama because I am a Christian and all Christians are right wing idiots, that assertion shows how truly stupid and unobservant you are. Becasue I used this blog to campaign for Obama. One atheist idiot named "Goliath" ("Go Lie") was stupid enough not to know what "happy days are here again" meant!
To be serious, Metacrock is correct to point out that too many atheists talk about science in far too reverential tones. But it is disrespectful to philosophy to generalize uncharitable non sequiturs from statements made from non-professionals who are coming from a context considerably different from his own. If he truly understood his Kuhn, he wouldn't be so rash.
I didn't do that. You think I did because you are childish and over emotional.
Post a Comment