On 5/31/2014 2:35 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 31 May 2014, at 10:30, LizR wrote:
Evidence for what? Without telling us, and making clear it is an assumption, this is
still a "pseudo-religion" which indeed corrodes science, as I have experience at the front.
Religion per se is a too large word. Only institutionalized religion asks for
authoritative arguments, and revelation.
And what religion is not institutional? The word itself means "to bind together". A
religion is an institution.
Like institutionalized materialism (cf genetics by Lyssenko in the USSR).
To oppose religion and science transforms science into a religion. On the contrary, non
confessional theology has to come back in the academy, that's all. The problem is not
religion, it is the authoritative arguments. Some atheists club are worst than catholics
is the way they dismiss evidences.
A loose accusation. Can you cite examples?
They confirmed my felling that atheism is just, like Christianism, a variant of the
Aristotelian theology.
Science per se is agnostic, on the existence of a primitive physical universe or any
other god-like notion.
Not on the god-like notion of a judgemental creator who provides revelations to prophets
about how people must behave to avoid eternal torture, aka "theism".
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
