Some of the arguments in that really intrigued me, and I certainly do not claim to know very much about Creationism or Evolution.
But at least one of the arguments was incomplete. Scientists don't bloody well date stuff by how old the other stuff is that was found with it! They have genuine scientific ways to do it. They know how quickly certain elements decay so they can measure how much of that element is present, work out how much would've been present when the artifact was deposited there, and work it out like that. It's not circular logic that falls apart the second someone questions it.
I know a lot of science is faith. I would be offended by any scientific stuff that attempted to 'disprove' religion in this sort of way, too.
I'm very much in favour of Steven Jay Gould's idea of Non-Overlapping Magisteria, or NOMA: religion and science kept in the separate spheres where they do their best work. Science can't answer timeless questions like "What's the purpose of life?" or "What's the right way to live?", although it can answer specific questions which can help us look for solutions to those puzzles. The extreme hostility towards all religion expressed by some scientists, like Richard Dawkins, repels me - they don't sink as far as Chick, but the same snobbery is there.
Speaking purely personally, the astonishingly beautiful, clever, clunky, and bizarre design of the universe is utterly delightful. I am as thrilled by homeotic genes and cosmic inflation as I am by the heart-skip-a-beat moments of beauty in the KJV or in the Exaltation of Inanna. Chick has nothing but sadism; he lacks the glee that made John the Baptist leap in his mother's womb.
And I feel the same way about the universe; some science, some religion, some 'we'll-never-know', but I can't express it nearly as beautifully as you just did.
I didn't know about NOMA before; sounds cool.
I believe that joy & tolerance are what keeps us going & makes it all so damn exciting.
Thanks for answering in such detail. I don't know nearly as much about all this as you but I always enjoy reading your take.
I loathe Jack Chick's stuff and always have. Even when he says things that I would ordinarily agree with, I want to disagree just because of the way he says them. And I remember, as a child, being terrified by the twisted, demonic-looking expressions on the faces of his character. I couldn't help thinking then, and now, that Chick is Not A Nice Man At All if he treats everyone who disagrees with him so contemptuously. At least, when Hieronymous Bosch painted similarly contorted and angry figures surrounding Jesus on His way to the crucifixion, one of the "sinner" faces he painted was his own. Jack Chick could use a dose of that kind of humility, IMO...
Isn't he a shocker? Jack Chick is put to shame by the example of Christians who make their points graciously, compassioniately, and without lies.
Is the Bosch painting this remarkable image? I'm reminded of Sister Wendy's comments (I think it was a similar scene in stained glass) - how the mocking crowd have made themselves into monsters through their own cruelty, with distorted, brutal, demonic faces; they have made their own hell. In the centre, the serene Christ looks like he's dreaming about something better than this nightmare. For Bosch to recognise his own human capacity for ugliness by placing himself amongst the crowd is a powerful act of humility. (Do we know which face is his?)
Damn, that nun gossip was the only unique thing I possessed. It was told to be by a REAL NUN who did the cookery lessons at the nun-owned building the Glasgow social work people kept psychologists in. And the head of it was a nun with about eighty degrees. And you could makes scones while you waited for them to check your head was working.
And the head of it was a nun with about eighty degrees.
The Obtuse Mother.
Speaking of working heads, I've posted several over the top gleeful bits of gosh-wow stuff over the last few days, notably here and in talk.origins. We're into the second stage of the Lexapro working - not just the relief of the glums, but the return of my default manic enthusiasm. Look out world!!!
I went looking for more information, but was unable to find it. So that story about Bosch painting himself into the crowd of Christ's mockers (which I heard a few years ago, but can't for the life of me remember where -- probably a sermon) is probably apocryphal. The closest I could find was this comment:
It was once believed that the sharp-nosed hermit helping to support the unconscious Saint Anthony in the left panel of the Saint Anthony triptych was a self-portrait...
So, looks like it was the wrong painting to begin with; and apparently it's now been discounted as a self-portrait anyway. Sigh. Move along, nothing to see here... but if Bosch had painted himself into the crowd, that would have been very Biblical of him.
___ In another recent interview, Bill Moyers asked if she had ever been struck by the paradox of a cloistered nun becoming a TV star. She matter-of-factly responded, "Yes, it's bizarre. It's the kind of thing only God would do." ___
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2004-05-27 04:31 am (UTC)Some of the arguments in that really intrigued me, and I certainly do not claim to know very much about Creationism or Evolution.
But at least one of the arguments was incomplete. Scientists don't bloody well date stuff by how old the other stuff is that was found with it! They have genuine scientific ways to do it. They know how quickly certain elements decay so they can measure how much of that element is present, work out how much would've been present when the artifact was deposited there, and work it out like that. It's not circular logic that falls apart the second someone questions it.
I know a lot of science is faith. I would be offended by any scientific stuff that attempted to 'disprove' religion in this sort of way, too.
What's your opinion on it, Kate?
no subject
Date: 2004-05-27 05:44 am (UTC)Speaking purely personally, the astonishingly beautiful, clever, clunky, and bizarre design of the universe is utterly delightful. I am as thrilled by homeotic genes and cosmic inflation as I am by the heart-skip-a-beat moments of beauty in the KJV or in the Exaltation of Inanna. Chick has nothing but sadism; he lacks the glee that made John the Baptist leap in his mother's womb.
You guess it again. I'm supposed to be writing.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-28 12:11 am (UTC)And I feel the same way about the universe; some science, some religion, some 'we'll-never-know', but I can't express it nearly as beautifully as you just did.
I didn't know about NOMA before; sounds cool.
I believe that joy & tolerance are what keeps us going & makes it all so damn exciting.
Thanks for answering in such detail. I don't know nearly as much about all this as you but I always enjoy reading your take.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-27 04:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-27 05:21 am (UTC)Is the Bosch painting this remarkable image? I'm reminded of Sister Wendy's comments (I think it was a similar scene in stained glass) - how the mocking crowd have made themselves into monsters through their own cruelty, with distorted, brutal, demonic faces; they have made their own hell. In the centre, the serene Christ looks like he's dreaming about something better than this nightmare. For Bosch to recognise his own human capacity for ugliness by placing himself amongst the crowd is a powerful act of humility. (Do we know which face is his?)
no subject
Date: 2004-05-27 06:18 am (UTC)Here endeth my insider information from a real nun.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-27 06:29 am (UTC)"You mean you *are* a giant penguin?!" - David Hatch, somewhere in ISIRTA
no subject
Date: 2004-05-27 07:10 am (UTC)Damn, that nun gossip was the only unique thing I possessed. It was told to be by a REAL NUN who did the cookery lessons at the nun-owned building the Glasgow social work people kept psychologists in. And the head of it was a nun with about eighty degrees. And you could makes scones while you waited for them to check your head was working.
*nostalgic sigh*
no subject
Date: 2004-05-27 04:05 pm (UTC)The Obtuse Mother.
Speaking of working heads, I've posted several over the top gleeful bits of gosh-wow stuff over the last few days, notably here and in talk.origins. We're into the second stage of the Lexapro working - not just the relief of the glums, but the return of my default manic enthusiasm. Look out world!!!
no subject
Date: 2004-05-27 04:06 pm (UTC)Hurrah for antidepressants that work!
Wheeeee! *dances with you*
no subject
Date: 2004-05-27 09:22 am (UTC)It was once believed that the sharp-nosed hermit helping to support the unconscious Saint Anthony in the left panel of the Saint Anthony triptych was a self-portrait...
So, looks like it was the wrong painting to begin with; and apparently it's now been discounted as a self-portrait anyway. Sigh. Move along, nothing to see here... but if Bosch had painted himself into the crowd, that would have been very Biblical of him.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-27 06:18 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-27 06:34 am (UTC)___
In another recent interview, Bill Moyers asked if she had ever been struck by the paradox of a cloistered nun becoming a TV star. She matter-of-factly responded, "Yes, it's bizarre. It's the kind of thing only God would do."
___
She'd have made a terrific quantum physicist. :-)