Interesting article on the trivium. If I only spent as much time understanding the trivium as I did fakeology…
When I was first introduced to the concept of the liberal arts and its revival called the Trivium (grammar, logic, and rhetoric) and the Quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy), I thought to myself – at last, the keys to understanding the spelling and illicit word magic that so continuously are used against us. I […]
Life on a western compound in Saudi Arabia reminds me in many ways of life on a large embassy compound when posted outside of ones home (western) country. There is housing. There is security. There are amenities. There are rules and restrictions.
There really are no new ideas. Views swing back and forth, like a pendulum. We’ve bread a whole new generation of children who won’t take risks. Essentially, we have a whole wave of the population that could be government workers. There will be no inventors, or people willing to take risks. Society will stagnate. Perhaps that’s what’s happening now in the West.
Until we let our children fall out of a tree, they will never learn their limits. That’s sad.
It had been mere months since the gregarious principal threw out the rulebook on the playground of concrete and mud, dotted with tall trees and hidden corners; just weeks since he had stopped reprimanding students who whipped around on their scooters or wielded sticks in play sword fights.
Science = Religion
Cherry Pick email
I enjoyed your discussion in ep. 599 of the Neil Degrasse Tyson clip on
science and “climate deniers”. I just want to add an observation that I
think you and John may have missed (or didn’t have time to point out)–the
language that Tyson and his interviewer use is religious language.
Tyson says: “Science is not there for you to cherry-pick.it’s true whether
or not you believe in it. You can decide not to believe in it but that
doesn’t change the reality.” As a Christian, I recognize this as faith
language, particularly used in apologetics. I have heard and read arguments
and sermons just like this: “[The Bible] is not there for you to
cherry-pick.it’s true whether or not you believe in it.”
I submit that science as a whole-with no distinction between fields of
study, some of which are more theoretical than not-is being positioned as a
religion, with scientists as modern-day prophets. As technology and science
become more complicated, so that, as the old quotation goes, they seem more
like magic, belief in science looks more like faith. You and I have not done
any experiments or studies, or seen any scientific results; we trust (or
don’t trust J ) what the researchers tell us-and not even that, what the
media tells us the researchers have found. We as a culture have come to
believe that the scientists, with their many educational degrees and arcane
jargon that only the privileged few understand, are the truth seekers and
truth tellers. This has to be frustrating to scientists who truly do want to
seek truth and who know how scientific inquiry should work-not by consensus
or by adhering to a belief system, but by being open to the possibility of
your theories being proved wrong by the next round of experiments. Today,
though, the media gives “science says” or “a scientific study has proved”
the same weight as “God says” or “The Bible/Koran/Torah says..” had for the
faithful in centuries past.
That means that you and John and all of us listeners, as science skeptics or
“deniers,” are the modern-day heretics. When does the stake burning begin?