If you can assume a certain final outcome as "good," science is a useful tool to systematically achieve outcomes which are increasingly homogeneous with the "good" outcome by judging and choosing between alternate principles with increasingly general applicability.
If you can assume a certain overarching principle as "good," religion is a useful tool to systematically define principles which are increasingly specific applications of the "good" principle by judging and choosing between alternate outcomes with increasingly heterogeneous properties.
Problem is, they both try to digitally map an analog world. "God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth." Do you trust the lines you draw, or the infinitely precise spirit you're trying to capture like smoke with a butterfly net.
"Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known."
I wrote about what this Slashdot article got me thinking about... And I talk about the apparent arbitrary nature of the world God has created. Apparent being the key word. You can choose to believe it is arbitrary.
Slashdot Mirror
If you can assume a certain final outcome as "good," science is a useful tool to systematically achieve outcomes which are increasingly homogeneous with the "good" outcome by judging and choosing between alternate principles with increasingly general applicability.
If you can assume a certain overarching principle as "good," religion is a useful tool to systematically define principles which are increasingly specific applications of the "good" principle by judging and choosing between alternate outcomes with increasingly heterogeneous properties.
Problem is, they both try to digitally map an analog world. "God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth." Do you trust the lines you draw, or the infinitely precise spirit you're trying to capture like smoke with a butterfly net.
"Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known."
I wrote about what this Slashdot article got me thinking about... And I talk about the apparent arbitrary nature of the world God has created. Apparent being the key word. You can choose to believe it is arbitrary.
y /
http://yumbrad.com/archives/2004/07/20/the-stor