Monday, June 11, 2007


Ham Handed

Well, the above, which comes from Answers in Genesis' new monument to ignorance (via Blue Grass Roots), has certainly convinced me.

The collective learning of the entire human race throughout history on one side and the written down musings of Bronze Age shepherds on the other. No brainer.

This photo has the heading cut off, which is most likely "Different Starting Points." Having no heading makes it easier to interpret YOUR caricature of Faith vs. Reason in what they say. Their point here is not that "I think..." is wrong. Descartes began with an epistemological starting point of total skepticism. That is, he denied all knowledge, and tried to start over, beginning autonomously (from himself as the starting point). He reasoned from the apparent awareness/knowledge of his own thinking (cogito) to knowledge of his own existence (sum). He appeared to bridge epistemology and ontology, which is why this was considered a momentous breakthrough. Nonetheless, philosophy based on this starting point has failed to deliver. You may have a general definition of "human reason" and think it has succeeded, but competent philosophers have a specific definition, and think it has failed in many significant ways. One key problem it has, is the problem of induction. The concept of God's revelation (both general in nature and specific/verbal/propositional in scripture) gives us another "starting point" for reasoning, that overcomes the limits of induction. You clearly don't accept that revelation could be a way we could know, but it remains logically coherent. This juxtaposed signage is meant to convey a generally acceptable philosophical contradistinction.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

. . . . .


How to Support Science Education