moral truth

To demonstrate not only the difference between scientific/descriptive knowledge and metaphysical/prescriptive knowledge, but also the greater degree of both accessibility and authority in the latter, consider the following: There are scientific experiments which everyone knows (accessibility: tick) without question (authority: tick) simply should not (prescriptive: tick) be performed ((and there honestly is no need for… Continue reading moral truth

true feeling

Just watched The Changeling with my wife (‘endured’ would be the term she’d use!), and really enjoyed it.  There are some real gut-wrenching moments in there, which I won’t elaborate on here. One thing I found interesting was the particular (and familiar) feeling of deep satisfaction and relief I (and my wife – and anyone… Continue reading true feeling

‘other’

Definition: Let us take ‘cosmos’ as a term denoting ‘the universe’, the ‘world’, or ‘everything that we see’, etc. Statement 1: The cosmos was created and is sustained by an ‘other’. Statement 2: The cosmos is all that there is (and ever has been and ever will be). Both statements assume the above conceptual definition… Continue reading ‘other’

coins have 2 sides

-you can’t say something is ‘evil’ if you’re not already assuming some concept of ‘goodness’ -you can’t say something is ‘poorly designed’ unless you’re assuming what ‘good design’ looks like -you can’t say something is ‘chaotic’ unless you know what ‘order’ is -and you don’t have goodness, design or order without some idea of teleology

religion impeding science?

In a 2007 debate with John Lennox (viewable here), Richard Dawkins vocalises his frustration that religion (in his view) ‘stuntifies’ true scientific understanding: “The scientific enterprise is an active, seeking… an active seeking out of gaps in our knowledge… [a] seeking out of ignorance, so that we can work to plug that ignorance.  But religion… Continue reading religion impeding science?

knowing about knowing

Epistemology is (loosely defined) as the study of knowledge. As the ending of this very sentence will show, it is circular to assume ( that is, before investigation or a priori ) that you know what it means to know something (i.e. that you know what knowledge is!).