On Apr 6, 2007, at 4:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Jim Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
...we teach students to think critically, to use science and
reason to
arrive at conclusions about the world...
...the solution arrived at by Thomas Aquinas, which had the dual
result of
(1) opening the church of the high middle ages to science and
philosophy
(contrary to what most non-philosophers seem to assume, philosophy was
regarded by conservatives of the middle ages as a dangerous
rational alternative
to theology), and (2) getting Thomas canonized.
It was a great moment in the history of reason, and for a long
while European
civilization (and its new world offshoots) steadily built upon its
foundation,
leading eventually to Jim's second point that (for a time) many of us:
While, as (almost) always Chris is correct in his reference to Thomas
Aquinas, and to 'reason' and 'science', it would, I think, be a
mistake to couple the two as if they invariably go together.
Science cannot make sense without reason, but it is perfectly
possible to produce and/or to analyze non-scientific statements by
reason. Much of what we know is arrived at by reason, and not by
scientific analysis.
Incidentally, by 'reason' I mean the use of logic, whether formal,
classical, etc. etc.
Peter
Peter Harzem, B.Sc.(Lond.), Ph.D.(Wales)
Hudson Professor Emeritus
Department of Psychology
Auburn University
Auburn, AL 36849-5214
USA
Phone: +334 844-6482
Fax: +334 844-4447
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Personal E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
