sate: You are certain your experiences are transcendant.
cc: Just because you imagine it don’t make it so.
The proof is in your words, not my imagination. You have frequently described your experiences in metaphysical terms.
sate: You are certain science is inadequate to describe nature.
cc: I never said that !! (ps. certitude inhibits good listening abilities)
You would have to type awful hard for me to hear it. I never said you said it. Perhaps you should work on your own perspicacity, then judge mine.
But, I do say science isn’t all there is to understanding our lives.
There is a difference and it’s not just semantics.
In fact you mean even the basic tools of science are not enough.. reason, evidence, inference, knowledge, observation. These are insufficiently magical. It’s not just semantics, its se-magics that is the problem.
cc: Tell you what: when I can turn on the news after the most recent crisis or catastrophe, be it Hurricane Katrina, or the wild fires, or various aspects of our failing economy, or the next big one - and not hear a parade of “experts” confiding “no one could have expected such a thing.”
Then, maybe your sentence won’t sound so shrill.
I’m struggling to follow the logic here.. really really bad examples aside**.. some experts are idiots, or are dodging culpability.. therefore I’m not allowed to illustrate a point supported by copious unambiguous evidence as such? What if I said tobacco causes cancer? Does that hurt your ears? The shrillness I mean? The earth is round (an oblate spheroid to be precise), germs cause many diseases and electronics flow through some metals in objects we call “machines”. I’m sure of all this! Oh the arrogance! did your head explode at the sheer hubris of me thinking, nay, saying aloud such folly?
cc: ...And since then campaigning (...pamphleteering) and having some interesting talks with serious right wingers and religious folks (wherein lies the origins of my recent focus on the horrors of certitude). It’s mulling around, but obligations, the bills and the job crack the whip and I gotta go.
I sympathize with the aversion to the dogmatic religious folk. That said I do not know why you can not understand the difference between blind, unrelenting faith and mutable evidence-based conclusions. You have plainly seen me invite anyone to question or correct what I have said- when was the last time a Q&A;session followed a mass? I’m glad to change my position the second it is merited by the facts.. how many religious nuts will say the same?
** Why your examples are poor
Experts predicted the failure of the levees and the danger of a hurricane for years. Read more here. quote- ...Reuters reported that in 2004, more than 40 state, local and volunteer organizations practiced a scenario in which a massive hurricane struck and levees were breached, allowing water to flood New Orleans. Under the simulation, called “Hurricane Pam,”
Further, in the case of Katrina most of the “shocked experts” were people trying to save their jobs. Knowing about the problem in advance would have made them accountable.
The wildfire called the “Tea fire” was caused by people. Experts can not be expected to magically know the arbitrary future actions of stray humans. So far as I know the cause of the others is unknown, but there are natural fires every season and experts have long warned of the danger of the santa anna winds. Whoever says CA wildfires can’t be foreseen is either an idiot or a beaurocrat nervous for their job.
Better examples in the sense of more fun and striking could be found in one of my favourite hubris-puncturing books , Cerf and Navasky’s wonderful compendium The Experts Speak. Here are a couple I like.
“Experimental evidence is strongly in favor of my argument that the chemical purity of the air is of no importance.” - L. Erskine Hill (Lecturer on Physiology at London Hospital), quoted in the New York Times 1912
“The cloning of mammals by simple nuclear transfer is biologically impossible.”-Drs. James McGrath and Davor Solter, reporting on nuclear transfer research they conducted. Dec 1984
“X-rays are a hoax.” -Lord Kelvin c 1900