[Sca-cooks] OT: Faith and challenges

[tom.vincent at yahoo.com]

From: Patrick Levesque <petruvoda at videotron.ca>

You seem to be confusing “Dogma” and “Faith” which are two entirely different things. 
 
>> I am not.  'Dogma' was a film with Ben Affleck & Matt Damon. 'Faith' was an album by George Michael. :)
Actually, though, dogma is the engine, faith is the fuel; faith is the clay, dogma is the pot.  Dogma are articles of faith contained in a particular religion.  They are the concepts of the religion that must be accepted 'on faith' (or otherwise) for one to be considered a member of that religion.

This (and the mini-debate which spontaneously sprouts every time this kind of subject matter pops up on a list) seems to be an unfortunate representation of the Atheist/Believer antagonism that exists in North America (and maybe elsewhere, I just can’t attest to its presence outside North America). Whereas the former seem to be unable to define themselves, except by opposition to the latter, and the each tend to vilify the other. (Ok, it’s a rather gross caricature, but you get the point. Your list of bones of contention for example is rather convenient for a militant atheist, except that it casts aside the whole of the social and historic context in which all of these phenomenon did occur, and without this context the argument is invalid). 
 
>> So by spouting loaded phrases like 'vilify', 'gross caricature', 'bones of contention' and 'militant atheist', you hope to add light without heat?  Whenever valid biblical criticism is presented, the first defense is often name-calling!  How about addressing the evidence?

I am glad that you included sociology in your list because, well, it’s not a science. 
 
>> You are wrong.  It is a science.  It is the study of society and human social action.
 
I would have added art, history, music, philosophy the whole of the humanities to the list. 
 
>> You could, as each has some science in them, but they are not all sciences.  No matter.
 
Instead of precise answers to just as precise and culturally meaningless questions, these domains seek to appropriate these answers and include them in a coherent vision of our world. 
 
There is no “truth” to them, 
 
>> You are incorrect again.  In art, for example, a painting is painted with oil-based or water-based paints; on wood, canvas or metal; of a particular size; of a particular subject; painted on a particular date or range of dates; by a particular artist or artists.  Each of those characteristics are 'truths' about the artwork.  The *interpretations* of a piece of art or even a cooking recipe are what distinguishes the 'truths' from 'opinion'.
and these fields tend to change pretty damn fast, but they at least “try” to make sense of the entire mish mash instead of being purely oppositional. 
 
Duriel


Petru

(Eventually this thread will make some people uncomfortable – I suggest that when this happens you take the debate to another list or to private e-mails instead, as this is a period cookery list, after all). 

 
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Tom Vincent
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
When shall it be said in any country of the world, my poor are happy; neither ignorance or distress is to be found among them; my jails are empty of prisoners, my streets of beggars; the aged are not in want, the taxes not oppressive; the rational world is my friend because I am friend of its happiness; when these things can be said, then may that country boast of its constitution and government.
-- Tom Paine 



 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ansteorra.org/pipermail/sca-cooks-ansteorra.org/attachments/20060531/3025f5a2/attachment-0005.htm>