35926¥276 For Example, Scholars Who Wished .......
Q&@
TO DETERMINE THE SHAPE OF THE EARTH
SCANNED THE BIBLE LOOKING FOR RELEVANT REFERENCES LIKE AMERICAN SECTARIANS
AND SO ON! ONE POINTED OUT THAT IN JOB 38:13, it says that God can 'take hold of the edges
of the earth, and the wicked be shaken out of it'? This implies - reasoned the pundit - that the earth
had 'edges' that God can 'take hold of', it must be a flat square! Another sage rejected this interpretation,
calling attention to Isaiah 40:22, where it says that God 'sits enthroned above the circle of the earth'! Isn't
thàt próóf that the earth is round? In practice, this meant that scholars sought knowledge by spending years
in schools & libraries, reading more and more texts, and sharpening their sectarian logic so they could under-
stand 'the texts correctly'?! The Scientific Revolution proposed a very different formula for knowledge:
Knowledge = Empirical Data x Mathematics! So ìf we want to know the answer to some question, we
need to gather relevant data and then use mathematical tools to analyse them. For example, in order to
gauge the true shape of the earth, we can begin by observing the sun, moon & planets from various locations
across the world? Once we have amassed enough observations, we can use trigonometry to deduce not only
the shape of the earth, but also the structure of the entire solar system! In practice, this means that
scientists seek their specialist knowledge by spending years in observations, laboratories & on research
expeditions, gathering thus more & more empirical data & sharpening their mathematical tools so théy can
interpret their data correctly.... The scientific formula for knowledge led to astounding breakthroughs in
astronomy, physics, medicine & multiple other disciplines! But it has had one huge drawback: it could not deal
with questions of value & meaning? Medieval pundits could determine with absolute certainty that it is wrong
to murder & steal, & that thpurpose of human life is to do God's bidding, because scriptures said so!? But
scientists cannot deliver such ethical judgments. No amount of data & no mathematical wizardry can prove
that it is wrong to murder. Yet human societies cannot survive without such value judgements?! One way to
overcome thìs difficulty was to continue using the old medieval formula alongside the new scientific method?
SCANNED THE BIBLE LOOKING FOR RELEVANT REFERENCES LIKE AMERICAN SECTARIANS
AND SO ON! ONE POINTED OUT THAT IN JOB 38:13, it says that God can 'take hold of the edges
of the earth, and the wicked be shaken out of it'? This implies - reasoned the pundit - that the earth
had 'edges' that God can 'take hold of', it must be a flat square! Another sage rejected this interpretation,
calling attention to Isaiah 40:22, where it says that God 'sits enthroned above the circle of the earth'! Isn't
thàt próóf that the earth is round? In practice, this meant that scholars sought knowledge by spending years
in schools & libraries, reading more and more texts, and sharpening their sectarian logic so they could under-
stand 'the texts correctly'?! The Scientific Revolution proposed a very different formula for knowledge:
Knowledge = Empirical Data x Mathematics! So ìf we want to know the answer to some question, we
need to gather relevant data and then use mathematical tools to analyse them. For example, in order to
gauge the true shape of the earth, we can begin by observing the sun, moon & planets from various locations
across the world? Once we have amassed enough observations, we can use trigonometry to deduce not only
the shape of the earth, but also the structure of the entire solar system! In practice, this means that
scientists seek their specialist knowledge by spending years in observations, laboratories & on research
expeditions, gathering thus more & more empirical data & sharpening their mathematical tools so théy can
interpret their data correctly.... The scientific formula for knowledge led to astounding breakthroughs in
astronomy, physics, medicine & multiple other disciplines! But it has had one huge drawback: it could not deal
with questions of value & meaning? Medieval pundits could determine with absolute certainty that it is wrong
to murder & steal, & that thpurpose of human life is to do God's bidding, because scriptures said so!? But
scientists cannot deliver such ethical judgments. No amount of data & no mathematical wizardry can prove
that it is wrong to murder. Yet human societies cannot survive without such value judgements?! One way to
overcome thìs difficulty was to continue using the old medieval formula alongside the new scientific method?
16 sep 2019 - bewerkt op 19 sep 2019
- meld ongepast verhaal
Log in om een reactie te plaatsen.
- O 25 apr 2013 mo 14 lf 272 een andere vriend, Omar, volgt 'm op
- O 25 apr 2013 mo 13 lf 271b: bij de dood v/d profeet hebben ~~~
- O 25 apr 2013 mo 12 lf 271 om het tweede geval te illustreren,
- O 25 apr 2013 MO11lf 270 om het eerste geval toe te lichten: het
- O 25 apr 2013 'n 2e zuil is 't gebed, of beter 5 dagelijkse/MO10
- O 25 apr 2013 MO9/lf 269bij de dood van Oethman, in 656, is dit
- O 25 apr 2013 lf 268 ook díe verzen zijn dus in kleine groep MO8
- O 24 apr 2013 myDiary@deeljedroom.nl&mijnnattedroomvoornederland
- O 24 apr 2013 Allemaal één pot nat: Mohammed, Pim, Theo, Geert?
- O 24 apr 2013 lf 266/5 in 622 vindt de profeet zijn toevlucht zo
- O 24 apr 2013 lf 265 {4} de Stem, die i/d islam gelijkgesteld is
- O 24 apr 2013 lf 265 {3} de jonge twenman trok zich graag terug
- O 24 apr 2013 lf 264 de prof eet mo(hamm)ed: alles wat we weten
- O 24 apr 2013 13 islam lf 263 het 7de eeuwse Arabia waarin de
- O 24 apr 2013 lf 262 deze verflauwing van de meerderheid