The View From 1776
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Liberal-Progressive Scientism vs. Religious Faith
Believing themselves to be guided solely by science, liberal-progressives swallow whole banquets of contradictory and unprovable hypotheses.
Liberal-progressivism’s mantra is that only logical positivism has a place in public discussion. Logical positivism is defined, in part, to exclude any proposition outside the realm of mathematics or outside of assertions that can be validated by reference to material things within the sensual perception of humans.
The human soul is considered not to exist, and spiritual inquires are dismissed as ignorance.
Spiritual religion, therefore, is excluded from public discussion and is dismissed as inadmissible for legal argument. Nor are moral values emanating from spiritual religion acceptable to liberal-progressives as valid criteria for public standards.
When a recognized scientist professes spiritual religious faith, the liberal-progressive community therefore reacts to expel him. An example of that exclusion is described in Ken Connor’s essay.
Is this dichotomy warranted?
All scientists, I believe it safe to say, accept mathematics as scientifically valid. Yet mathematics, in its higher branches, deals in a world of logic altogether outside the purview of tangible materiality. Even in high-school-level mathematics one encounters contradictory concepts such as square roots of negative numbers. This is particularly true in the world of nuclear particle physics and force fields, where whole schools of theory are based on unproved ideas such as string theory.
Scientists seeking ultimate answers to the origin, nature, and future of the cosmos have pursued a long series of mutually exclusive, speculative theories.