HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Aug. 3, 2006 "In the writing of books, there is no end. In the making of mistakes there is no end. In the dreaming, in the keeping of faith, in the fulfilling of dreams. In the building of men, in the building of minds, in the building of institutions." Frank A. Hilario (http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=11991) Perhaps it was just one such mistake that led the prolific writer Bertrand Russell to make the remark, "What science cannot tell us, mankind cannot know." Or maybe Bertrand was only joking. How can one know for sure when a few words get ripped out of context and slapped down in some article like this? On the other hand, If Bertrand used the word "mankind" and he wasn't really talking about womankind, and if there is such a thing as "women's intuition," then perhaps women are sufficiently intuitive to see more clearly the limits of science. In his statement, "What science cannot tell us mankind cannot know" Bertrand Russell appears to be intuitively blind to these limits. Talk about Bert's hubris! How can anyone be so smug and so blind and so illogical? Illogical? Well yes. How is any scientist ever going to use science to prove the assertion that "What science cannot tell us, mankind cannot know"? If science can't prove that statement is true, how can a scientist assert it with a straight face? It's a sentence like "This sentence is false." As reasoners we become mad dogs chasing our tails. Fred mentions that I do not address each one of the quotes he gives. Perhaps I will respond to some or all of these quotes in other U-K articles. Fred Smith expresses concern that I do not address every quote and comment he puts in his long articles. Well, the start of this debate came when some time ago Fred wrote this sarcastic article entitled "Oh How I Weep For Those Innocent Millions Of Murdered [Aborted] Babies!" . Later, after I replied publicly, Fred wrote that his article was actually about stem cell research. As regards abortion I say it is wrong for women and doctors to waste human babies just because the women do not want their babies. I say it's wrong to produce a human life and then show no hesitation in wasting that life. If the pregnant woman's life is at great risk because of the pregnancy, then probably the best thing to do IS to have an abortion. Regarding this issue there is no hard-and-fixed dogmatic rule. Circumstances alter cases. In my opinion if the end justifies the means, contraception isn't wrong as long as it is safe. In the same way, in fertility clinics helping women get pregnant, killing the extra unwanted embryos is part of the medical methodology. A strict moralist probably will encourage doctors to find other sources of stem cells besides human embryos. Some other opinions of John Waters you might consider quotes are: "What is possible in theory isn't always good to put into practice." and "Once a human being is known to exist people need to help the growing person recognize, nurture, develop, educate, and demonstrate his or her special faculties. Abortion breaks this rule." and "Statistically speaking in a population encouraging carelessness in sex makes it more likely that sexually transmitted diseases will result as well as unwanted pregnancies. Strict morality is a protection against both." and so forth. A scientist can't prove that human life begins when the fetus is first conscious or the fetus is first sensitive to light, or to sound, or to pain, and so forth. It's a matter of personal opinion when a human life begins. So who's opinion do you pay the most attention to? We can study the medical science, but what do the experts on morality say? Even if we grant that Fred Smith is an expert or near expert on science, we can ask the question, is Fred an expert on morality? Where are Fred's long articles on ethics? One last thing. Fred writes that I am "silly" in my kindness to certain small animals like mud dauber wasps. That is just his personal opinion. I also am of the opinion that kindness is something that some scientists don't have much of. Just for a tidbit I read somewhere that Albert Einstein was very unkind to his first wife. More germane to this topic, each scientist has been trained for years to keep himself physically and emotionally isolated from his experimental subjects. This socially reinforced coldness makes it easier for experimental scientists to go about cutting or otherwise torturing animals so as researchers they can gain more social points for producing more academic papers. A kind empathetic person simply can't follow that example, even if he or she has high IQ and high grades in science courses. Furthermore, scientists killing an animal for facts is somewhat different from hungry people killing an animal for food the way the native aborigines did, after saying a prayer thanking the animal for its gift of life to them. After all, the aborigines had to eat animals to survive. Many non-aboriginal people today eat meat and they say a prayer of thanksgiving before they start to dine. There is a kind spirit in many of these people if not in all of them. This kind spirit isn't "silly." Like how about sticking a pin through the thorax of a totally defenseless live butterfly. An empath can't do it. ------------ About the author: sixty-six years young, and vigorous in mind, body, emotions, and spirit, John L. Waters is an independent researcher on self-healing, integration, creativity, and unity. To help demonstrate the effectiveness of his research, John has created thousands of drawings, paintings, instrumental music pieces, songs, prose pieces, poems, and other inventions. John has used his research to help persons remove a mental block and solve a problem. John also gives personal presentations which illustrate his research results. Each one of these works demonstrates the effectiveness of John's research. For more information, read John's letters of recommendation: about John's self-healing and integration: about the mystical energy or yogic force and related topics: about John's independent research: about John's seeking an agent or a publisher: Email: blueguntwo@yahoo.com Comment on this article here! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com. Please link to this article rather than copying and pasting it onto your site (which would be unauthorized and illegal). |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
