asanta - 13 January 2010 09:06 PM

....much fewer than the number who are able to inflict their nonsense on forum boards, I’m sure….due to the lower skill level involved.

You are SO right !

VYAZMA - 14 January 2010 05:39 AM

Think of these books as articles, or magazines in book form. Maybe 5-20 pages worth of thoughts stretched out into a book of 300 pages, or 197 pages etc…

Thats is a very good observation of how they are.

Thank you Skepticeye.  Well I did ask didn’t I. I appreciate your time.
Yes it’s a great thing, Scientific Method.  It is an orthodoxy which obviously works but also does not work. In the way you describe it, it stands as a model of the world and more poignantly it is a model (reflection even) of a part of human behaviour, ( that part which collates and rationalises and also that part which wants definitive answers and to feel secure)  From evidence of looking at the world, people and myself I don’t see it as a complete or totally accurate model.  The rest of our understanding, behaviour and consequently the rest of our brain is left out. It works for some things in the world.  The world itself doesn’t work like this even if we think it does. ’ It could be argued that Scientific Method itself has shown up that Scientific Method is inadequate as it stands when we look at the quantum world and ask ‘what actually is matter?’ There is something else at play, not God or other superstitions, we’ve done all that, maybe literally the unknown, an unknown, a permanent unknown . We are not good at not knowing, Science won’t like it and people won’t like it.
It does tend to stop some of the verbiage though,( it starts a whole new lot, thinking you know what the unknown is!!) which brings up the other issue, why are people saying so much? The web is a great ‘democratiser’, no one is really more important than anyone else, to heavily criticize another person who has some ideas is just a way of trying to push them out of the picture, POWER.  C’est la vie.
We are all washerwomen now?  Only joking, don’t want to be washerwomanist.
Like the all important Priest who had spent a lifetime prostrating himself before God saying he was nothing in the eyes of the Lord. He saw a Novice doing the same thing and said ‘oh, look who’s trying to be nothing now!’
Also questions remain, why are we here, who are we, what is the universe, what is consciousness?  Stemming from these is, for instance ‘how do we live and how do we stop killing each other? Seriously, this is why it is important to question everything because we haven’t solved it yet.

Graham-

We are all washerwomen now?  Only joking, don’t want to be washerwomanist.

Yes, I took a small literary liberty here. I wanted to paint a Monty Python type picture of the old hag, toiling away and decrying the injustices of life. Painting the picture that says-“Yes, lots of people have always had lots to say.

graham jones - 15 January 2010 06:18 AM

Thank you Skepticeye.  Well I did ask didn’t I. I appreciate your time.
Yes it’s a great thing, Scientific Method.  It is an orthodoxy which obviously works but also does not work. In the way you describe it, it stands as a model of the world and more poignantly it is a model (reflection even) of a part of human behaviour, ( that part which collates and rationalises and also that part which wants definitive answers and to feel secure)  From evidence of looking at the world, people and myself I don’t see it as a complete or totally accurate model. 

Because Science is not a model, it is a method. Anyone who suggests otherwise is bent on disappointment.

The rest of our understanding, behaviour and consequently the rest of our brain is left out. It works for some things in the world.  The world itself doesn’t work like this even if we think it does. ’ It could be argued that Scientific Method itself has shown up that Scientific Method is inadequate as it stands when we look at the quantum world and ask ‘what actually is matter?’ There is something else at play, not God or other superstitions, we’ve done all that, maybe literally the unknown, an unknown, a permanent unknown . We are not good at not knowing, Science won’t like it and people won’t like it.

I don’t understand what you are getting at here. It sounds confused…

It does tend to stop some of the verbiage though,( it starts a whole new lot, thinking you know what the unknown is!!) which brings up the other issue, why are people saying so much? The web is a great ‘democratiser’, no one is really more important than anyone else, to heavily criticize another person who has some ideas is just a way of trying to push them out of the picture, POWER.  C’est la vie.
We are all washerwomen now?  Only joking, don’t want to be washerwomanist.
Like the all important Priest who had spent a lifetime prostrating himself before God saying he was nothing in the eyes of the Lord. He saw a Novice doing the same thing and said ‘oh, look who’s trying to be nothing now!’

Touche

Also questions remain, why are we here, who are we, what is the universe, what is consciousness?  Stemming from these is, for instance ‘how do we live and how do we stop killing each other? Seriously, this is why it is important to question everything because we haven’t solved it yet.

demonstrating yet again that Science is not everything. It was never claimed to be.

There is a new interview with Jennifer Michael Hecht on the podcast connected to http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.com/ , with Massimo Pigliucci and Julia Galef.

The “teaser” for the episode is
http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.com/2010/07/podcast-teaser-jennifer-michael-hecht.html
This is a full webpage introducing the speaker & books and inviting questions—I like the layout.

The interview itself is at
http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs14-jennifer-michael-hecht-on-science-religion-happiness-an.html

The interview questions refer to D.J.‘s interview on POI.
Hecht makes the point that some famous folks we think of as theists (i.e. St. Augustine) were largely anti-superstition, and there are various quotes that if religion is contradicted by science then religion needs to change.

Hecht is working on a book on suicide and that part of the interview is also interesting—she makes a quasi-emotional, quasi-philosophical argument against suicide because of the importance of community.

Finally
  the 15th episode (8/15/2010) is also really good. I like the still of having two compatible hosts.