On 06 Jan 2013, at 20:07, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 1/6/2013 6:56 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
A greath truth. Every human knowledge has also social
consequiences. When I say "A". I don´t only say "A is true". I say
also that because A is true and you must accept it because a set of
my socially reputated fellows of me did something to affirm it, you
must believe it, and, more important, I deserve a superior status
than you, the reluctant.
As a consequence of this fact o human nature (which has a root in
natural selection). every corpus of accepted knowledge is
associated from the beginning to a chiurch of guardians of
ortodoxy. No matter the intentions or the objectivity or the asepsy
of the methods of the founders. There is a power to keep, much to
gain and loose, and as time goes on, real truth becomes a secondary
question. The creatie, syncere founders are substituted by media
polemizers and mediocre defenders of the status quio.
This power-truth tension in science was biased heavily towards the
former when State nationalized science at the end of the XIX
century, because science was standardized and homogeneized to the
minimum common denominator, chopping any heterodoxy, destroying
free enquiry which was vital for the advancement. Now peer reviews
are in many sofft disciplines, filters of ortodoxy, not quality
controls.
As the philosopher of science Feyerabend said, It is necessary a
separation of State and science as much as was necessary a
separartion of State and church: Because a state with a unique
church of science is a danger for freedom, and because a science
dominated by the state is a danger for any science.
The standardization of science towards materiamism was a logical
consequence of the a philosophical stance of protestantism: the
Nominalism, that rejected the greek philosophical legacy and
separated dratically the revelated knowledge of the Bible form the
knowledge of the things of the world without the bridge of greek
philosophy. Mind-soul and matter became two separate realms. Common
sense or the Nous were not a matter of science and reason, like in
the greek philosophy (what is reasonable included what makes common
sense, just like it is now in common parlancy), but a matter of the
individual spirit under the firm umbrela of the biblical
revelation. The problem is that this umbrela progressively
dissapeared, and with it, common sense. That gave a nihilistic
relativism as a consequience. With the exception of USA, where
common sense is still supported by the faith.
The other cause were the wars of religion among christian
denominations, that endend up in a agreement of separation between
church and state, where any conflictive view was relegated to
religion as faith, and only the minimum common denominator was
admitted as a foundation for politics, This MCD was a form of
political religion. This political religion was teist at the
beginning (As is not in USA) laater deist and now is materialist,
following a path of progressive reduction to accomodate the
progressive secularization (which indeed was a logical consequence
of the nominalism and the proliferation of faiths that the reform
gave birth).
In later stages, the political religion has dropped the country
history, and even reversed it, and, following its inexorable logic,
try to destroy national identity of each individual european
country, in the effort to accomodate the incoming inmigration
worldviews. This is in part, no matter how shockig is, the logical
evolution of the agreement that ended the religious wars of the XVI
century.
In the teistic and deistic stages the State made use of the
transcendence in one form or another for his legitimacy, since the
divine has a plan, and people belive in the divine, the legitimacy
of the state, in the hearths fo the people, becomes real when the
nation-state is inserted in this divine plan.
When, to accomodate the materialistic sects, marxists among them,
the state took over Science to legitimate itself, because the
State no longer had the transcendence as an option to suppor his
legitimacy. the legitimacy of the state was supported by a
materialistic sciece, subsidized, controlled and depurated from any
heterodoxy.
So there is the current science, an image of the state political
religion, Multicultural, relativistic and materialist.
Hi!
Excellent post!
OK.
Bruno
2013/1/4 Stephen P. King <stephe...@charter.net>
On 1/4/2013 9:54 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King
....very few scientists....
Sheldrake has done many successful experiments to empirically
prove what he claims.
The results are in his books. Some have been published in New
Scientist.
See http://www.sheldrake.org/Research/overview/
"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its
opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its
opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is
familiar with it." Max Planck.
--
Onward!
Stephen
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
