Quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Agreed. The problem in that case is with the individual, not the belief system.
However, the problem I have is with the atheistic belief system itself, not with the individual per se.
|
Fair enough, I see what you mean. But I think that in this respect the two belief systems are similar. Many atheists do not think that Christians are deluded, many Christians do not think atheists are.
Anyway, on another point, it seems you guys are arguing a SINGLE WORD now, namely science. I think you'll just have to agree to disagree on the EXACT value of the word science and accept that a lot of words don't have an exact value (or literary critics would be out of a job [img]tongue.gif[/img] )
You are staring yourselves blind on this one definition because you think it holds implications for your personal view, but it's just a *word*. By most people's standards, my study (English Literature) is not a science, but it IS a social science. I don't mind which they call it, as long as they know what the study itself entails (which is often a problem for people
).
So don't argue about a word, argue about content. What is theology in this modern age? What did it used to be?
From our world as it is now, I think we can deduct contemporary theology is a different thing from theology as practised for instance by Thomas Aquino.
Sorry LordK, going down to word level for a sec - one thing I know is that Theology is NOT a philosophy. That's just a completely different thing. They teach theology at my university, and while there is a specialiation course that educates people to be priests or ministers, the main course has nothing to do with people's personal beliefs. It STUDIES religion: Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, etc. It looks at parallels and differences, source texts, translations. Students are taught history, philosophy, languages. It is as much a science or as little as any other "social science". This is maybe not how theology was defined in the past, but it is the most logical sense of the word now. Possibly no science is 100% objective, because people come into it and people simply aren't objective. But that doesn't change the fact that Theology as taught today is NOT a philosophy (i.e. a way to look at the world, a way to regard and explain phenomena, a beliefsystem...).
That said, I really think you guys should get off the "Is a science is not is too" bandwagon. It doesn't seem to be going anywhere.
Some people define science in the narrowest definition of the word, thinking labs, experiments, calculation, hard evidence. Some of you define it in the broadest possible sense, as in "anything studied by humans". Something can be said for both but that's not the point. The point is that the little yes-no game isn't going anywhere, and you can pull out all the dictionaries you want, you're not going to sway the other side. Can't you just agree that in the narrow sense as described above, theology is NOT a science, and in the broad sense it IS? Or are you just enjoying being in each other's hair all the time for no good reason and I'm just interrupting a perfectly senseless debate? In that case, don't mind me, carry on... [img]tongue.gif[/img]
Oh and uh...
HAND all of you
[ 01-28-2003, 09:12 AM: Message edited by: Melusine ]