I also agree and disagree. It is possible to study relations, and indeed
aesthetics, but that is not where the action is an in these areas. Relationships
with spouses, friends, children, family, and even enemies are not primarily the
subject of study, but of living. When we study them we are not relating and
knowing relationally with other people, but carrying out a social science on a
particular subject.
However your point about diligence is well taken. our relationships require as
much (well usually more) diligence than our academic pursuits, and are in the end
far more God glorifying.
Jon
Jan de Koning wrote:
> At 08:53 AM 02/04/02 +1000, Jonathan Clarke wrote:
> >If we are going to talk about different ways of knowing we must not ignore the
> >aesthetic or the relational. Neither of these are scientific, but all are
> >important.
>
> I agree and disagree.
> Aesthetics and relations are fields of study as well, therefor
> scientific. Don't limit studying (=science) to the physical sciences,
> whatever they are. They should be studied and are based just like physics
> on your stand before God. That is: we must serve God everywhere. That
> includes all areas of life and study. If you don't you come easily to the
> idea, that after my prayer in the morning, leaving the door the guidance of
> the Spirit is not needed. It is in all you work and studying. I will
> never understand (I tried for many years) that less study is needed in
> aesthetics or relations than in physics or mathematics.
> Jan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 02 2002 - 16:24:19 EST