This post comes after a few days of contemplation. Albeit, I have been busy with other things so that this post is shorter than the usual 1 page that I try to submit. The question is: Will Science become the epistemology (how you know something is true) for objective truth. Have we seen the beginning insights into an academic world that relies upon science for its truth claims (sounds like an old aspect of post modernism to me) OR will we see science become the center of epistemology for objective truth (as stated above). I think we have seen the attempt that scientist have made to push their discipline to be the objective test for what is true. However, I do not think we will ever see 'Science' become the foundation for objective truth.
My objection is that there are still too many people who hold a worldview that is consistent with the metaphysical. It is also my contention that there will probably always be a majority of the world population that will hold a metaphysical foundation for what they think is true. The problem is: most of these people (pre-disposed to the metaphysical) will not be in the university and will not be teaching your children. However, the people teaching your children will probably be the ones who have a false presupposition for Science as the true test for objective truth.
Think on that!
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Subjective Science
Science is vogue for reality!
Science! What do you think of? Those weird shaped glasses with the different colored liquids. How about a big snake in a container that is fed the next unfortunate mouse!. Do you think of the skeleton hanging on the door? What about Spider man. Yeah, all you comic book geeks know what I am talking about. Better yet, you think of the microscope that can show you the smallest details of any substance you place under the lens. While these images are a good concomitant to the term of science, they do not define it.
Science, from a standard high school biology book, is defined as the investigation and understanding of nature. It is the observation, discovery, and interaction with the world. Please understand, the definition clearly states that science is the investigation and understanding of THIS (physical) world. Why then, do some scientists believe that they have a right, in the name of science, to investigate that which is other than the physical? Why do scientists think they can examine the metaphysical? Actually, it may be fairer to ask; why do some scientists think they can denounce the metaphysical? Have they ever been there? Do they know what it looks like? How about what it smells like. Is it dark, hot, cold? How do we get there? In all actuality, I think some scientists believe they have the right to denounce the metaphysical because they are pre-disposed, even indoctrinated (thank you Darwinian ideology), into thinking that this physical world is all there is.
The Darwinian theory (yes, it is theory and not fact) has been used as an ideological weapon by intellectual assassins and cultural elitist ever since The Origin of Species was published. The idea broke down barriers, permeated university campuses, and even challenged (possibly changed) the idea of objective truth and reality (Check out Nietzsche and the Darwinian undertones that permeate his writing). The point is that science is no longer seen as a route to discovery, investigation, and understanding. Science is vogue for reality.
Nietzsche said, “God is dead”. Man in the sixties said, “I am God”. Scientists today might say, “God? We have moved past that concept. Didn’t you get the memo? We learned how to clone him too!” Thus, the apostle Paul would claim, “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man…. Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator….” (Rom. 1: 22-23, 25)
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Nietzsche and a arrogant generation
This post comes from a recent insight that I have had in reading Nietzsche and contemplating the rise of the New Atheism. For a background to this post, I refer you to my friend's blog at academicchristianity.blogspot.com. Here you will find background to this post and be able to view a comment left by me under his heading, "Consider This".
I start with this question. Is the modern generation so arrogant as to think that they have 'evolved' and 'moved beyond' the heritage of their intellectual forefathers. Did the rise of the enlightenment accentuate the reality of the human reason or only the shallowness? It seems to me that with the rise of Darwinian motifs and the post-modern movement, God is all but dead for the man who is not looking for him. In fact, for the man or woman who holds to the naturalist worldview, for the man or woman who is a secular humanist, for the man or woman who believes in their capacity to reason, 'God' is not a viable option. In fact, 'God' is a weak option for a person who is weak (Darwinian intellectual selection at its best).
Nietzsche claimed, God is dead! There may be truth to that. At least for the man not looking for God, God is not relevant to him. However, can you see the metaphysical to know if he is really there? The irony is that the modern academic believes that his reason trumps the necessity of God for the whole world. Does this person think that everyone is ignorant, or only those who have not found salvation in the recesses of their own mental faculties. Do they think that they are above the intellectual tradition of the great statesman, philosophers, scientist, and theologians. Do they think that within one century, if it took that long, they have amassed enough insight with their reason to surpass the whole intellectual tradition of the known world. Maybe!
What seems blatant to me is not the question of the existence of God, although that s certainly important. Nor is it the Darwinian undertones that supplement the world view of many people. The grievance I have is with the person who is so arrogant to believe that their ability to reason actually nullifies the intellectual tradition of the past centuries. This person may answer that they have learned from the past intellectuals. To that I humbly submit, prove it!
I start with this question. Is the modern generation so arrogant as to think that they have 'evolved' and 'moved beyond' the heritage of their intellectual forefathers. Did the rise of the enlightenment accentuate the reality of the human reason or only the shallowness? It seems to me that with the rise of Darwinian motifs and the post-modern movement, God is all but dead for the man who is not looking for him. In fact, for the man or woman who holds to the naturalist worldview, for the man or woman who is a secular humanist, for the man or woman who believes in their capacity to reason, 'God' is not a viable option. In fact, 'God' is a weak option for a person who is weak (Darwinian intellectual selection at its best).
Nietzsche claimed, God is dead! There may be truth to that. At least for the man not looking for God, God is not relevant to him. However, can you see the metaphysical to know if he is really there? The irony is that the modern academic believes that his reason trumps the necessity of God for the whole world. Does this person think that everyone is ignorant, or only those who have not found salvation in the recesses of their own mental faculties. Do they think that they are above the intellectual tradition of the great statesman, philosophers, scientist, and theologians. Do they think that within one century, if it took that long, they have amassed enough insight with their reason to surpass the whole intellectual tradition of the known world. Maybe!
What seems blatant to me is not the question of the existence of God, although that s certainly important. Nor is it the Darwinian undertones that supplement the world view of many people. The grievance I have is with the person who is so arrogant to believe that their ability to reason actually nullifies the intellectual tradition of the past centuries. This person may answer that they have learned from the past intellectuals. To that I humbly submit, prove it!
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Contemplative
Have you ever wondered about your friend. How are they doing? Do you find yourself so enmeshed in your own 'reality' that you forget other people are present. Do you look at people as mere objects that should do the bidding of your every whim. Think 'be gone' and they leave. Or run when they walk into a room.
Selfish, does that describe you. It describes me. Maybe the principle is in the perspective. Try thinking of others in relation to how they think of you. Be careful though, you may get angry. However, you also might surprise yourself.
Do something extraordinary today. Show your friend that you are actually their friend and that they are not just a social wall that you bounce your ideas off of. Be a friend. Sadly, there are not enough of those in the world. Maybe you should change that!
Think on That!
Selfish, does that describe you. It describes me. Maybe the principle is in the perspective. Try thinking of others in relation to how they think of you. Be careful though, you may get angry. However, you also might surprise yourself.
Do something extraordinary today. Show your friend that you are actually their friend and that they are not just a social wall that you bounce your ideas off of. Be a friend. Sadly, there are not enough of those in the world. Maybe you should change that!
Think on That!
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Think Tank
I am posting to let everyone know of my current status. As of the moment, my computer has been fried (lightning does terrible things to a person). Nevertheless, the posts shall continue as I finish up this semester. To let you know what will be happening from now until the summer, I am listing for you the topics that will be under consideration tentatively from now until around October.
The remainder of April: Moral Degradation of Civilization
There will be post inspired by Nietzsche, Camus, and the book of Proverbs.
May: This whole month will be dedicated to Nietzsche. Posts will come from the book The Portable Nietzsche. Discussion will be based upon Western Civilization, God, and other scintillating topics.
June: This month will be dedicated to the philosophers. Specifically, it will entail the wisdom of various philosophers with a focus upon their solutions for a life that is well lived.
July-August: These months will focus upon the "Foundation of Education, Insufficiency of Indoctrination". I will be reading throughout the summer various scholars on the idea of education and the life of the mind. Specifically, I will address topics relating to Finding, Funding, and Finessing the Life of the Mind.
Finding: Discovering the Mind
Funding: Dedicating the Mind
Finessing: Distributing the Mind
September-October: [Tentative] Various treatises on my Systematic Apologetic
I know this seems like a lot, but I am excited about the possibilities of putting forth some of my ideas on these crucial and timely issues. I hope that you are as excited as I am about these upcoming series. Life never seems as invigorating than when you are discussing a new idea. Think On That!
The remainder of April: Moral Degradation of Civilization
There will be post inspired by Nietzsche, Camus, and the book of Proverbs.
May: This whole month will be dedicated to Nietzsche. Posts will come from the book The Portable Nietzsche. Discussion will be based upon Western Civilization, God, and other scintillating topics.
June: This month will be dedicated to the philosophers. Specifically, it will entail the wisdom of various philosophers with a focus upon their solutions for a life that is well lived.
July-August: These months will focus upon the "Foundation of Education, Insufficiency of Indoctrination". I will be reading throughout the summer various scholars on the idea of education and the life of the mind. Specifically, I will address topics relating to Finding, Funding, and Finessing the Life of the Mind.
Finding: Discovering the Mind
Funding: Dedicating the Mind
Finessing: Distributing the Mind
September-October: [Tentative] Various treatises on my Systematic Apologetic
I know this seems like a lot, but I am excited about the possibilities of putting forth some of my ideas on these crucial and timely issues. I hope that you are as excited as I am about these upcoming series. Life never seems as invigorating than when you are discussing a new idea. Think On That!
Monday, March 24, 2008
Decline of the Modern Generation Part III
This is the follow-up of the last blog entry that I posted concerning the issue of reasons for our moral decline. In review, the previous reasons were individualism and misapprehension of the truth. The third reason for the moral decline of the modern generation is the foundation of the family.
The Family, by definition, is: a group of individuals living under one roof with one head. Our current day understanding of a family to the extreme is the homosexual couple that cohabitates together with adopted children OR single-parent mothers OR fathers who work two jobs to support the children that were left to them when the other 'significant other' left to try and 'find themselves'. Now, I understand that these are stereotypical cases, but they are the immediate context in which we find ourselves living in. What you will find is that the definition of the family affirms the mroal decline of the modern generation because it hold the ideology of all three symptoms within its definition. There is individualism, misapprenhension of the truth( the definition itself implies that), and it does not even entail the proper idea of the family.
Now, the purpose of this blog is not to engage in a long discourse upon the definition of the family. Rather, it is to illustrate one vital point. People get their morality from their family. Other than the fact that they have certain understandable views of morality that they are pre-disposed too, they learn their moral values from their family. Thus, this modern generation has declined in its morality because the definition of a family, both etymologically and experientially, are completely false. Instead of building a morality under a two-parent home, consisting of a man and a women, they have learned and constructed a morality that was built, at best, by parents who built their morality upon a foundation that was not much better than their current child's is.
I understand that there is a lot more that can be said. What about parents who are single that teach proper moral values? Can't a homosexual couple divulge proper values to the children they rear? Isn't a family more about cultivating love and self-respect anyway? I do see the importance and necessity to answer these questions, but my point is that because the family has been identified incorrectly and lived out miseraby, our modern generation believes that they are morally accountable to no one and they can do anything. However, if you would like to know more about my views on the family then e-mail me a question or post a question in your comment box. Until next time, think on that!
The Family, by definition, is: a group of individuals living under one roof with one head. Our current day understanding of a family to the extreme is the homosexual couple that cohabitates together with adopted children OR single-parent mothers OR fathers who work two jobs to support the children that were left to them when the other 'significant other' left to try and 'find themselves'. Now, I understand that these are stereotypical cases, but they are the immediate context in which we find ourselves living in. What you will find is that the definition of the family affirms the mroal decline of the modern generation because it hold the ideology of all three symptoms within its definition. There is individualism, misapprenhension of the truth( the definition itself implies that), and it does not even entail the proper idea of the family.
Now, the purpose of this blog is not to engage in a long discourse upon the definition of the family. Rather, it is to illustrate one vital point. People get their morality from their family. Other than the fact that they have certain understandable views of morality that they are pre-disposed too, they learn their moral values from their family. Thus, this modern generation has declined in its morality because the definition of a family, both etymologically and experientially, are completely false. Instead of building a morality under a two-parent home, consisting of a man and a women, they have learned and constructed a morality that was built, at best, by parents who built their morality upon a foundation that was not much better than their current child's is.
I understand that there is a lot more that can be said. What about parents who are single that teach proper moral values? Can't a homosexual couple divulge proper values to the children they rear? Isn't a family more about cultivating love and self-respect anyway? I do see the importance and necessity to answer these questions, but my point is that because the family has been identified incorrectly and lived out miseraby, our modern generation believes that they are morally accountable to no one and they can do anything. However, if you would like to know more about my views on the family then e-mail me a question or post a question in your comment box. Until next time, think on that!
Friday, March 21, 2008
Last time, which was yesterday, I published an entry on the 'Decline of the Modern Generation'. This is the follow up to that post. The purpose of this entry for today is on what I believe are the symptoms of the moral decline in our generation
The first symptom of our generations' moral decline is individualism. Now, I understand that individualism can be a good thing. Even people who have a communal perspective have the tendency to decline in their morality. However, in America the idea of individualism has become even greater. It pushes the envelope upon the smaller man. It forces us to say, "If your in my way, then get out of the way". Individualism leads to self-centerdness, which leads to arrogance, that in tail leads to pride, and finally will end up in destruction. Individualism is not a bad thing IF you let it produce in you an understanding that you are unique as a person. However, if you think your uniqueness entitles you to bigger and greater things in life, you have been sorely mistaken.
Another symptom is our generation's sense of truth. Truth, if that is even a proper concept for some people, is about as real to some people as flying pigs. Truth is a concept that has become relative to people today. Some claim that since nothing can be known for sure, then truth must be relative to the situation and the person in that situation. Others may say that truth is a waste of time! What matters is progress. Economical progress, national progress, world progress become the rallying cry for those disinterested in the 'petty things of life'. Of course, they are petty until you are sued and find yourself in a courtroom wondering if all the money you have would be expendable for one inkling of truth. And yet, another group of people may say, 'whats true for me may not be exactly true for you'. I would then ask, what's true for you? I think that if they admit that something is true, at least they are claiming that some truth exist. The problem would be to determine if what they hold to be true is actually true, or mere opinion. I could even put their truth to test to see if it is true. However, I am afraid that what will inevitably happen is that the person will be convinced that their truth is real. Thus, they will exchange in pride and arrogance a position they really hold in ignorance. And then they have their reward. What they believe is true because of their pride is actually false because of their stupidity. Therefore, they contribute to moral decline because they hold false ideals to be true and spread their ignorance throughout the world.
That is enough for today. I hope I have given you some things to chew on. I will post a conclusion to this entry tomorrow.
The first symptom of our generations' moral decline is individualism. Now, I understand that individualism can be a good thing. Even people who have a communal perspective have the tendency to decline in their morality. However, in America the idea of individualism has become even greater. It pushes the envelope upon the smaller man. It forces us to say, "If your in my way, then get out of the way". Individualism leads to self-centerdness, which leads to arrogance, that in tail leads to pride, and finally will end up in destruction. Individualism is not a bad thing IF you let it produce in you an understanding that you are unique as a person. However, if you think your uniqueness entitles you to bigger and greater things in life, you have been sorely mistaken.
Another symptom is our generation's sense of truth. Truth, if that is even a proper concept for some people, is about as real to some people as flying pigs. Truth is a concept that has become relative to people today. Some claim that since nothing can be known for sure, then truth must be relative to the situation and the person in that situation. Others may say that truth is a waste of time! What matters is progress. Economical progress, national progress, world progress become the rallying cry for those disinterested in the 'petty things of life'. Of course, they are petty until you are sued and find yourself in a courtroom wondering if all the money you have would be expendable for one inkling of truth. And yet, another group of people may say, 'whats true for me may not be exactly true for you'. I would then ask, what's true for you? I think that if they admit that something is true, at least they are claiming that some truth exist. The problem would be to determine if what they hold to be true is actually true, or mere opinion. I could even put their truth to test to see if it is true. However, I am afraid that what will inevitably happen is that the person will be convinced that their truth is real. Thus, they will exchange in pride and arrogance a position they really hold in ignorance. And then they have their reward. What they believe is true because of their pride is actually false because of their stupidity. Therefore, they contribute to moral decline because they hold false ideals to be true and spread their ignorance throughout the world.
That is enough for today. I hope I have given you some things to chew on. I will post a conclusion to this entry tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
