Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site cybvax0.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!godot!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh
From: mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: various comments
Message-ID: <208@cybvax0.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 5-Nov-84 14:53:59 EST
Article-I.D.: cybvax0.208
Posted: Mon Nov  5 14:53:59 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 8-Nov-84 19:44:41 EST
References: <1433@pucc-h>
Organization: Cybermation, Inc., Cambridge, MA
Lines: 38

[Jeff Sargent] 
> Scientism.  It seems that some people view science as a nascent god, or at
> least as approaching omniscience, by claiming that there every phenomenon
> in the universe either can now be, or will eventually be able to be,
> explained *correctly* by science.  Believers in scientism assume the
> impossibility of miracles (an assumption for which there is no evidence
> that I know of).  When a phenomenon occurs which, as reported, can have no
> conceivable explanation according to known science or extrapolations
> therefrom, they either deny that any such incident ever occurred or else
> they devise explanations which differ from the observed, reported
> phenomenon.  Obviously I have the Resurrection in mind.  I think that people
> try to explain away the Resurrection of Christ because they don't *want* to
> believe that any such thing as a miracle-working God more powerful than they
> can exist.  It is, indeed, a matter of pride....

Pathetic try, Jeff.  But for the moment, I'll pretend to be a scientismist to
clarify the beliefs.  If I was a religious scientismist, I would believe that
science would provide the best explanations that humans can produce for
phenomina.  However, as an agnostic, I keep my mind open.  At the moment, I
think that's likely because other methodologies have much weaker error
correction strategies.

"When a phenomenon occurs which, as reported..."  In other words, when a
report is made.  Presuming the report is true leads to all sorts of
wonderful idiocy.  Why don't you believe in the reports of all the other
religions?  Do you deny those incidents ever occurred, or do you devise
explanations that differ from the observed, reported phenomena?  What about
the Golden Tablets that Joseph Smith discovered in upstate New York that lead
to the founding of the Mormon church?

In conclusion, science is not based on just any old reports.  Science is
based on reports of reproducible observations and results.  This is not a
matter of pride: science is humble in its acknowledgement that people are
fallible and deceitful. The purpose of the scientific method is to
establish a system that in large part discourages deceit and careless error.
-- 

Mike Huybensz				...mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh