gino@voder.UUCP (Gino Bloch) (09/14/84)
>>> "The Cosmos is all that is, or ever was, or ever will be." >>> Carl Sagan, Cosmos, Random House, N. Y., 1980. quoted by Paul DuBois, who then said: >> Sounds like dogma to me ... and other things. Paul: how are you going to discuss science if you don't recognize a definition when you see one? -- Gene E. Bloch (...!nsc!voder!gino)
bprice@bmcg.UUCP (09/20/84)
>Perhaps it has something to do with statements such as the >following: > >"The Cosmos is all that is, or ever was, or ever will be." >Carl Sagan, Cosmos, Random House, N. Y., 1980. >> >This not only doesn't leave the ultimate question open, it >answers it. Sounds like dogma to me (which creationists are >often accused of) and sounds like a statement in which there >is no room for uncertainty (which evolutionists repeatedly >claim to leave room for, as an assertion of their adherence >to the non-final nature of scientific endeavor). >-- >Paul DuBois {allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois Is this significant? I have an unverified feeling that this quote from DuBois gets right to the core of the Creationists problems with respect to science. Notice that DuBois quotes from Sagan, a scientist writing in a popularization: "The Cosmos is all ...". Since this is a popularization, one must understand that it is not to be read in the jargon, but in the popular language. In that context, we see that Sagan is defining the term "Cosmos", and by simple extension, defining the scope of the book. Yet DuBois, disliking the definition, sees it as dogma--sees the definition as promoting a fallacious assumption. The Creationist, as many other religious fanatics, insists that he, and only he, may define the terms of discourse; and that he may redefine those terms without warning. The scientist, whether religious or irreligious, insists on stable definitions--stable for at least the duration of the discussion. This latter insistence is obviously anathema to the one who believes that the universe itself is a matter of opinion. It seems that this difference of viewpoint goes a long way toward seeing why the Creationist will respond with anger, rather than understanding, when he is confronted with reality. -- --Bill Price uucp: {decvax!ucbvax philabs}!sdcsvax!bmcg!bprice arpa:? sdcsvax!bmcg!bprice@nosc