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 27 jan 2016 26-01-'43 er is 'n heel oude boeddhistische manier
- O 27 jan 2016 jr118b deze myDinadruk o/h parabolisch karakter ~~
- O 27 jan 2016 jr117b 'de myDi~verkondiging(en) van Yehosjoea' ~~
- O 27 jan 2016 Één v/d meest archetypische symbolen v/h middel-
- O 26 jan 2016 Je kunt alleen over jezelf lezen & over niets ~~~~
- O 26 jan 2016 Niet wie weinig heeft, maar wie veel wil is arm!!!
- O 26 jan 2016 jr116b hier moet dus wèl steeds bíjgezegd worden ~
- O 26 jan 2016 jr115cd bovendien, & dàt ìs nòg véél belangrijker,
- O 25 jan 2016 jr115b 'r zijn nòg mensen die hieraan argumenten
- O 25 jan 2016 jr114b 't gaat er om de vooronderstelling, dat het
- O 25 jan 2016 jr114 't beste voorbeeld v/d oude denktrant was al
- O 25 jan 2016 jr113 we kunnen bijna, vrijwel ongewijzigd, hier ~
- O 25 jan 2016 jr112VI het nieuwe ethos: (r)evoluties i/d ethiek
- O 24 jan 2016 jr111c er ÌS, ìn íeder gevàl, nog maar heel weinig
- O 24 jan 2016 jr111b èn tòch, al zou iemand maar ÈRGENS, ook