kdsub
Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Musicmystery I'm glad IB brought up this quote; it nicely complements the Gould article about science I linked to earlier. It also brings up back to Poe's "poets and mathematicians" as both needed components of true critical thinking--approaches from just the "poet" side or just the "mathematician" side will fall short. Likewise, this is why the religion/science divide in the Renaissance and, unfortunately, still today, is a false dichotomy. Created really as a compromise between Descartes and the Vatican, the model has been taken for truth since. As the OP notes, arguing from a narrow religious standpoint, e.g., no dinosaurs in the Bible, is limited to the point of irrational. LOTS of things that exist are not in the Bible either. And, this is only a subset of religious people--as Firm's point about religious scientists makes clear. But the "science" response often falls short of either science or critical thinking as well, merely buying into the either/or debate with arguments rooted to a narrow view of science. They, too, are repeating dogma, not thinking critically--as evidenced by the reliance on conclusions divorced from methodology, something that would make any "true" scientist cringe. As Gould notes above, thinking is broader than these narrow views from two artificial poles. Poe is right; we need the mathematicians, but we also need the poets--not for mere entertainment or reflection, but for true critical thinking. Interesting post Butch
_____________________________
Mark Twain: I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing
|