Re: RATE Vol. II

Gregory Arago wrote:

> It seems to me that about 95% of those who embrace evolutionary theory in
> America (of course this is a rough estimate based on looking at American
> 'science' from the outside) also provide energy to spiritual decline by paying no
> heed to spiritual language in their professional discourse (note: ASA
> discussion takes place outside of the laboratories and classrooms). What this means
> is not that natural scientists should use spiritual language in their
> naturalistic methodologies, but rather that those natural scientists who believe in
> spiritual things should be inclined to include an appropriate reference
> vocabulary in their professional teaching capacities. It may take a non-natural
> scientist, a philosopher, for example, to provide this, but then that would
> also help American society recover from the scientistic or technologistic
> tendencies it appears to be facing.
>

I'm a little confused exactly what you mean.

Science is quite limited to facts and fully testable arguments,
at least in principle. It has to be that way, because the
results should not depend on whether a Buddhist, or an atheist
or a Jew or agnostic or a Christian etc. does the science.
In that context, the kinds of things that can be discussed,
and the methodologies should have nothing to do with
spiritual matters.

There are matters like moral accountability and reckoning
the Judgment Day that should help influence our ethical
decisions; what we decide to do and how we decide to behave.
We can also talk about spiritual matters when we are in a
discussion about science with respect to religious matters.
And, of course, if someone ask if I am Christian, I am obliged
to say "yes". But that is quite different from inviting myself
into such discussions and pounding a bible on their heads.
The real talk is the walk.

I think spiritual matters really do not belong in professional
scientific discourse if the topic is purely scientific. Faith
issues should only come up when these other areas are
crossed.

Moreover, I think it is best to learn to recognize when we
are talking science and when we are talking matters of faith.
Science is most easily abused when that boundaries are not
recognized or even acknowledged.

by Grace we proceed,
Wayne
Received on Thu May 25 10:22:01 2006