The Modern Antiquarian. Stone Circles, Ancient Sites, Neolithic Monuments, Ancient Monuments, Prehistoric Sites, Megalithic MysteriesThe Modern Antiquarian
Home Latest Posts Forums Maps Help
Browse Sites News Blog Contributors The Books
Head To Head   The Modern Antiquarian   General Discussion Forum Start a topic | Search
The Modern Antiquarian
In defence of science
173 messages
Select a forum:
I'm not sure I fully understood all of that, but I think I agreed with some of it. What I do have a problem with is the way science seems to have been branded as reductionist and nihilistic. I think this is a very narrow cliche and one with which I cannot agree. There's so much more to science that reductionism. To me science is as much holistic as it is atomistic. It is a quest for knowledge and should rightly embrace the whole of nature, including the emotional and spiritual aspects. I regard a desire to know what is currently unknown to be an eminently healthy pusuit.

I have quoted the saying "There's no reality, only perception", but I don't interpret this in a nihilistic way. I view the saying as refering to the divergence of perception between individuals at an emotional level. In this sense reality is not an absolute, it depends on your point of view.

One person may look at a Ferrari and perceive it as a highly desirable vehicle, whereas another may perceive it to be phallic emblem, a boy's toy. In nihilism the Ferrari is merely a figment of everyone's perception. I cannot hold with this view because the collective experience is essentially the same, only the interpretation differs. The Ferrari exists at a physical level for everyone, but each individual weaves it into their own world view in a different way.

If someone told me that the Ferrari was a boat then we could test his perception by launching it into water and seeing if it fufilled the function of a boat, which it would not; and what a waste of a good Ferrari that would be. We could therefore conclude that his perception was flawed. This is what I mean when I challenge somone to justify their assertions. On the other hand if someone said that the Ferrari was "poetry on wheels", I would conclude that he was speaking metaphorically and might choose to agree or not, but I would not expect him to substantiate his view.

I think where I differ from some of the other opinions expressed in these threads is that I do not regard having an alternative perception as being a free ticket to spout a load of unsubstantiated crap as though it were fact.


Reply | with quote
Steve Gray
Posted by Steve Gray
25th September 2003ce
22:50

In reply to:

Atom Heart Motherfucker (morfe)

2 replies:

In defence of the Universe! (nigelswift)
Re: In defence of science (morfe)

Messages in this topic:

Terms & Conditions  |  Home  |  Julian Cope presents Head Heritage Top of page