but, IMO, you're way too accepting of the "myths" of science as being positive accruements or updatings. Consider the possibility that this "updating" might make our understanding even worse than Biblical Genesis--and that's really saying something. After all, Biblical Genesis was almost certainly constructed from several unknown source documents to reverse engineer the underlying theology of the early Christian church. An alternative rejected Gnostic version has a Pantheon of Gods, with our authorized Christian God less than perfect, and the Devil not so bad--and very misunderstood.
Nonetheless, the various threads of Modern Science might not only be wrong in detail--they could be really wrong. Thomas Kuhn was the first modern thinker to conceptualize the dilemma in his Structure of Scientific Revolutions, but few have been willing to face the horror. He got his first insight thinking about Aristotle as a scientist . . . .
|Rebooting Genesis: a new creation myth||110||Darryl Sloan||11-Jun-19 11:05|
|Re: Rebooting Genesis: a new creation myth||40||drrayeye||11-Jun-19 18:02|
|Re: Rebooting Genesis: a new creation myth||25||Darryl Sloan||13-Jun-19 10:52|
|Couldn't disagree more||23||drrayeye||13-Jun-19 12:25|