|
The usual problem that causes all of the angst about "proof" and the science/religion conflict is that religious organizations branch out from their domain, that of "should", and try to place themselves in the secular domain, that of "is".
If you want to know "should I have sex", ask your priest, your guru, your coven mother, or whoever you lean on for spiritual support.
If you want to know "what is sex", don't ask those people. Actually, do ask those people, but also ask people who work on "what is" (scientists). If your spiritual advisor insists on a "what is" answer that the "what is" people disagree with, find a new spiritual advisor.
You cannot pick your reality, but you can pick how you respond to reality. Religion, when it isn't sullied by power, materialism, and hubris, is about what the proper way to respond to reality is. Religions who try to dictate what reality is -- when and how the world will end, how the human race came to be, the layout of the crystal spheres upon wich the planets dance -- are suffering from hubris. So are scientists who try to dictate to others how they should respond to reality -- the difference is, you aren't going to scientists for moral advice, so they can be as huberific as they want without utterly destroying the value of their peer-reviewed research. (The scientific social system attempts to encourage scientists to tear down each other's hubris -- sort of like how capitalism attempts to have greedy people tear down each other's greed.)
Meh. I think I wandered off topic a touch. =)
__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.
|