Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jonathan
So you're talking about specific information that points to evolution? how does that relate to you 'waking up as an animal and then correcting yourself with modern information' or 'doing what plants and animals do'?
As for your other comments, I also believe in evolution, but it seems like its a bit of a stretch to expect all cultures to find that to be the case. Science is one way of explaining the world among many others. Religious schools are simply trying to preserve a more traditional way of thinking; the real issue is whether or not evolution can be reconciled with these traditions and whether it is ethical to impose something so normative. As for your second comment about anatomy and the church, it seems that the church was attempting to obscure facts that did not fit with their own symbolic structures. Obscuring information, or limiting our reality in such a way as to obscure other types of worldviews/realities, is a common practice even today. Can we not say the same for those we deem to be insane: those that hold worldviews that don't quite fit in with what we consider to be rational? I think its a bit presumptuous to assume that the church was trying to keep people stupid. I feel like that holds to a normative ideal that science is an undeniable truth, rooted deeply in a quasi-religious symbolic structure, when in reality it is one of many explanations for how we can think of the world and its phenomenon. I'm still not sure how or if this relates to your comment on modern information and how it points back to evolution.
|
for example the study of biology
origin of life > bacteria > organism > plants, animals
this is correct information about life
without spiritual talk
ok how i wake up as an animal
so i wake
the sun shines
the sun cycles that influenced bacteria that uses the energy of the sun for 4 million years, like plants
i wake up > the sun shines > plants wake up > bio-activity photonic process