Posted by richard on May 1st, 2012
i stumbled across this essay about translating the name eve
but what it shows is that all of our concentration on the historicity of adam&eve is our issues not theirs. the ancients thought differently that do we. a culture dominated by stories and sounds, by oral not written forces, a culture we do not understand without great effort and study.
people at church often tell me i think too hard, that the faith is very simple, like a child can understand it-easily and intuitively. my only reply is i don’t see things that way.
Mercier’s and Sperber’s “argumentative theory of reason” provides a strong case for supporting group reasoning processes like the scientific one, which are built around challenges to any one individual’s beliefs or convictions. These processes may be the only reliable check on our going vastly astray. By the same token, the theory also suggests that if you insulate yourself from belief challenge, you are leaving yourself vulnerable to the worst flaws of reasoning, without deriving any of the benefits of it.
on motivated reasoning
His trouble with Camper alerted him to fashions in science – fashions that scientists find difficult to shake off because their reputations are likely to have been secured by those fashions. He was also convinced that good science embraces a subjective as well as objective dimension. This is because what scientists see in the natural world depends upon what they are prepared to contemplate seeing. He was prepared to contemplate the human intermaxillary bone. It demonstrated to him that imagination matters as much as investigation.
Barfield argued that we need to recover our full imaginative capacities if we are deeply to know that the world is alive. Matter, he believed, would then be seen for what it once was, as an expression of spirit. (“Matter” is linked to “mater”, or mother, remembered in the expression, mother earth.) This might not be so difficult to achieve because, actually, we experience it every day. When you perceive the matter called a human being speaking, you spontaneously know those perceptions as one person communicating with you, another person. You do not have a theory of other minds, as some philosophers have proposed, driven by a flattening scientistic ideology. We know such matter as spirited people – as souls, you might say.
good, football and boxing should join dog fighting, dueling, bear baiting, cock fighting, whale hunting, slavery, as things left behind as humanity matures and extreme risk without commensurate benefit emerges as immoral.
“boy-killing, man-mutilating, money-making, education-prostituting, gladiatorial sport.”
it’s the natural thing to want to talk about it with your closest friends. don’t rush it, if pieces of the topic come up, express yourself, but don’t feel like you need to start the topic. if you are not careful you will lose friendships over the issues. imho, friendships are more important than me expressing myself loudly and often….if people ask, i’ll offer my advice. otherwise i’m quiet. besides, i might very well be wrong, better to listen carefully.
when my dad had brain surgery the dr told him he had slipped and cut into his music appreciation part, my dad replied that he didn’t need it since he only listened to country western music. the really interesting thing is that dad listened to opera from then on until the tumor killed him. i wonder what that says about music and brain surgery?
Symbiosis rules, and we are all lichens.