From: (No Email available)

Date: 2004-08-26 09:34:44

Comment:

Yes you may be correct here mainly in theory. One thing to keep in mind is that Truth does not have to be proved for it to have been so and to continue to be so {discovered or not}. 1+1 equaled 2 before anyone thought to represent that fact. Science can eventually validate some truths, but not all. Science is a tool not the yard stick for truth. No one ever scientifically or directly measured Love, a mind or even Gravity emperically. At most any evidence for somethings is simply indirect. Scientists have just as much faith in the existence of gravity for instance as religous zelots have in ideas of GOD.

Faith is Faith however it describes the dataexperience.

Dogmatic Science is as bad as Dogmatic Religion!

Who is Holyer then whom? Who honors the truth more, and what in fact is Truth. If its not tangible, or externally measurable does it not exit? There is something very presumptuous about this questions built in assumptions and all questions posed like it.

It presupposes objective seperation of knower from known. And that is an ideological faith. A potential position one merely follows. Also an unproven position for the analy aware. Such views are a mere useful convention for the expression of the source in the most universaly understood format available for what ever scenario you find yourself in.

Religion is a metaphysical interpretation of experience, Science is physical one. They both are correlated and complimtary and exist interms of a tangled hierarcy not an orderd one. What gives rise to what, is in fact the wrong question to be asking! It has an erroneous assumption built in that has never be demonstrated in truth, neither subjectively nor objectively. But we wont point that out, just go from there as in a mere logical equation. The initial state of the system must be regarded, but since we can't measure every fact externally in some tangible way, then isnt there something wrong with the erroneous expectation of absolute objective proof, the holy grail of classical Science. This hope is exactly that, a presumptuous faith no more or no less valuable then any other championed ideology.

These old out moded top town theories need to give way and be complimented buy fresh systemic bottom up theories. The earth can be perceived factually as both round and or flat. It in fact has never been only either, but we sure have a but load of ideologies that make such assumptions. And you know what they say about those. Assumptions that is!