There is more to epistimology than empiricalism. In fact, the scientific method itself is founded upon metaphysical principles. The arrogance of methodological naturalism to establish itself as the only valid source of truth is logically inconsistent. The claim that science is the only source of "knowing" anything is what both Christians and others are defending here.
Your good-time rock-and-roll plastic-banana piece-of-crap brand of American Buddhism has very little to do with the real thing. Why don't to you the Dalai Lama's book and read it for yourself. It is pretty clear what he is talking about, and the differences with Christianity are clear, BUT....BUT! The points he is making about an intelligent designer and the mechanistic materialism which is the Religion of Science is clear...crystal clear.
Of course...in an effort to close your mind and deny anything that requires an actual thought process or intellectual investigation, I am sure you would crucify the Dalai Lama without remorse or second thought. So be it, a house divided...
Good points or no, you really didn't address the central theme of my post. I had no intent to get into the flame war about the validity of ID (although I think it is). My point was simply to battle the closed minded of those that think that ID is simply a Christian Creation Science idea in new clothes.
I said:
In view of the profound differences between Tibetan Buddhism and Christianity, it simply isn't credible to dismiss intelligent design as simply "a repackaging of [Christian] creationism."
You said:
The problem with intelligent design is that it's a firmly Judeo-Christian agenda outlined by monotheistic origin mythology.
Tenzin Gyatso would probably be surprised to learn that he's promoting "Christian creationism." In his new book he criticizes what he calls "radical scientific materialism." And, like Phillip Johnson, the Berkeley professor, he doesn't hesitate to point out that the materialistic worldview is every bit as metaphysical as a theistic one.
Still, it's absurd to label Gyatso's work a stalking horse for "Christian creationism." After all, if you call him by his proper title, he is the 14th Dalai Lama.
In his new book, The Universe in a Single Atom, the Dalai Lama warns readers about the consequences of seeing people as "the products of pure chance in the random combination of genes." This materialistic account is "an invitation to nihilism and spiritual poverty." Correct.
He writes that "the view that all aspects of reality can be reduced to matter and its various particles is as much a metaphysical position as the view that an organizing intelligence created and controls reality." What's more, he insists that both "are legitimate interpretations of science."
In view of the profound differences between Tibetan Buddhism and Christianity, it simply isn't credible to dismiss intelligent design as simply "a repackaging of [Christian] creationism."
Bigoted and closed-minded critics claim that intelligent design "effectively promotes the Bible's view of creation." For them, what's happening there in Kansas and elsewhere is merely an attempt to get "Christian creationism" in through the back door.
Tenzin Gyatso would probably be surprised to learn that he's promoting "Christian creationism." It's true that his new book criticizes what he calls "radical scientific materialism." And, like Phillip Johnson, the Berkeley professor, he doesn't hesitate to point out that the materialistic worldview is every bit as metaphysical as a theistic one.
Still, it's absurd to label Gyatso's work a stalking horse for "Christian creationism." After all, if you call him by his proper title, he is the 14th Dalai Lama.
In his new book, The Universe in a Single Atom, the Dalai Lama warns readers about the consequences of seeing people as "the products of pure chance in the random combination of genes." This materialistic account is "an invitation to nihilism and spiritual poverty." Correct.
He writes that "the view that all aspects of reality can be reduced to matter and its various particles is as much a metaphysical position as the view that an organizing intelligence created and controls reality." What's more, he insists that both "are legitimate interpretations of science."
In view of the profound differences between Tibetan Buddhism and Christianity, it simply isn't credible to dismiss intelligent design as simply "a repackaging of [Christian] creationism."
The other misrepresentation that can't withstand scrutiny is the one that depicts advocates of intelligent design as being opposed to scientific inquiry.
Nothing could be further from the truth. We welcome scientific inquiry. We want our kids to learn more about evolution, not less. We want them to understand both its strengths and its weaknesses.
What we oppose is the idea that nothing can be taught that challenges the belief that materialism accounts for everything from the beginning to the end. It's not a scientific claim; it's a philosophical or metaphysical one. Like the Dalai Lama, we oppose metaphysics being taught under the guise of science.
It is the close-minded academics who are being dogmatic, foreclosing scientific inquiry. They call even the merest mention of scientific evidence suggesting that life couldn't have arisen as a result of an unplanned, random process as "religion," and they throw it out.
Now, this debate isn't about science. It's about the philosophy of materialism, which insists that it alone answers all of life's questions. It will countenance no rivals. It will smear its dissenters even, now, the soft-spoken monk from Tibet.
Slashdot Mirror
There is more to epistimology than empiricalism. In fact, the scientific method itself is founded upon metaphysical principles. The arrogance of methodological naturalism to establish itself as the only valid source of truth is logically inconsistent. The claim that science is the only source of "knowing" anything is what both Christians and others are defending here.
Your good-time rock-and-roll plastic-banana piece-of-crap brand of American Buddhism has very little to do with the real thing. Why don't to you the Dalai Lama's book and read it for yourself. It is pretty clear what he is talking about, and the differences with Christianity are clear, BUT....BUT! The points he is making about an intelligent designer and the mechanistic materialism which is the Religion of Science is clear...crystal clear. Of course...in an effort to close your mind and deny anything that requires an actual thought process or intellectual investigation, I am sure you would crucify the Dalai Lama without remorse or second thought. So be it, a house divided...
Good points or no, you really didn't address the central theme of my post. I had no intent to get into the flame war about the validity of ID (although I think it is). My point was simply to battle the closed minded of those that think that ID is simply a Christian Creation Science idea in new clothes. I said: In view of the profound differences between Tibetan Buddhism and Christianity, it simply isn't credible to dismiss intelligent design as simply "a repackaging of [Christian] creationism."
You said: The problem with intelligent design is that it's a firmly Judeo-Christian agenda outlined by monotheistic origin mythology. Tenzin Gyatso would probably be surprised to learn that he's promoting "Christian creationism." In his new book he criticizes what he calls "radical scientific materialism." And, like Phillip Johnson, the Berkeley professor, he doesn't hesitate to point out that the materialistic worldview is every bit as metaphysical as a theistic one. Still, it's absurd to label Gyatso's work a stalking horse for "Christian creationism." After all, if you call him by his proper title, he is the 14th Dalai Lama. In his new book, The Universe in a Single Atom, the Dalai Lama warns readers about the consequences of seeing people as "the products of pure chance in the random combination of genes." This materialistic account is "an invitation to nihilism and spiritual poverty." Correct. He writes that "the view that all aspects of reality can be reduced to matter and its various particles is as much a metaphysical position as the view that an organizing intelligence created and controls reality." What's more, he insists that both "are legitimate interpretations of science." In view of the profound differences between Tibetan Buddhism and Christianity, it simply isn't credible to dismiss intelligent design as simply "a repackaging of [Christian] creationism."
Bigoted and closed-minded critics claim that intelligent design "effectively promotes the Bible's view of creation." For them, what's happening there in Kansas and elsewhere is merely an attempt to get "Christian creationism" in through the back door.
Tenzin Gyatso would probably be surprised to learn that he's promoting "Christian creationism." It's true that his new book criticizes what he calls "radical scientific materialism." And, like Phillip Johnson, the Berkeley professor, he doesn't hesitate to point out that the materialistic worldview is every bit as metaphysical as a theistic one.
Still, it's absurd to label Gyatso's work a stalking horse for "Christian creationism." After all, if you call him by his proper title, he is the 14th Dalai Lama.
In his new book, The Universe in a Single Atom, the Dalai Lama warns readers about the consequences of seeing people as "the products of pure chance in the random combination of genes." This materialistic account is "an invitation to nihilism and spiritual poverty." Correct.
He writes that "the view that all aspects of reality can be reduced to matter and its various particles is as much a metaphysical position as the view that an organizing intelligence created and controls reality." What's more, he insists that both "are legitimate interpretations of science."
In view of the profound differences between Tibetan Buddhism and Christianity, it simply isn't credible to dismiss intelligent design as simply "a repackaging of [Christian] creationism."
The other misrepresentation that can't withstand scrutiny is the one that depicts advocates of intelligent design as being opposed to scientific inquiry.
Nothing could be further from the truth. We welcome scientific inquiry. We want our kids to learn more about evolution, not less. We want them to understand both its strengths and its weaknesses.
What we oppose is the idea that nothing can be taught that challenges the belief that materialism accounts for everything from the beginning to the end. It's not a scientific claim; it's a philosophical or metaphysical one. Like the Dalai Lama, we oppose metaphysics being taught under the guise of science.
It is the close-minded academics who are being dogmatic, foreclosing scientific inquiry. They call even the merest mention of scientific evidence suggesting that life couldn't have arisen as a result of an unplanned, random process as "religion," and they throw it out.
Now, this debate isn't about science. It's about the philosophy of materialism, which insists that it alone answers all of life's questions. It will countenance no rivals. It will smear its dissenters even, now, the soft-spoken monk from Tibet.