HP3000-L Archives

December 2002, Week 1

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"rosenblatt, joseph" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
rosenblatt, joseph
Date:
Wed, 4 Dec 2002 13:10:00 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (42 lines)
Greg Stigers makes a number of well thought out points to counter some of
Roy's equally well thought out points. This is what debate is about, the
sharing of knowledge, ideas and informed opinions. I think that point is
also the essence of this thread.

Scientists debate scientists, philosophers debate philosophers, theologians
debate theologians. This is the time way of furthering knowledge. This is an
"apples to apples" debate. When theologians seek to use the language of
science or vice-versa we get an "apples to oranges" debate. While from a
culinary point of view this makes a fine start to a fruit salad, it does
little to further knowledge and the exchange of ideas.

Talking at cross-purposes leads nowhere. Using the rhetoric of science, one
can prove theology disregards measurable facts and therefore is full of
improvable suppositions. Using the rhetoric of theology, one can show that
science disregards the intangible and therefore is full of improvable
suppositions. (There are many other arguments and counter arguments but
these will suffice.)

If the above is true then the only answer is to seek common ground. There
must be a common language between disciplines. This language entails using
your mind to encompass ideas that you have yet to grasp. You do not need to
agree or accept the idea as truth you just need to understand what the
person means and why. Essentially it is talking to, not at, your
counterpart.

Preconceived notions, visceral reactions and fear make this type of social
intercourse impossible.
Arguments designed to convince someone of your correctness are the least
likely to convince anyone of anything, other than your closed mindedness.
Arguments designed to learn and teach new ideas will create better
understanding for everyone involved. Keep in mind that there is a reason one
has two ears and only one mouth. There is nothing better for garnering
wisdom than silence.

The opinions expressed herein are my own and not necessarily those of my
employer.
Yosef Rosenblatt

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

ATOM RSS1 RSS2