There is no disingenuous bastard quite like Jerry Coyne.
Today he posted the top ten scientific discoveries and accomplishments
of 2012. An impressive list to be sure. He then posted the top ten religious
discoveries and accomplishments of 2012 and, you guessed it, because Jerry is just
about the most clever person this side of Richard Carrier, the list was empty!
Hah! That Jerry! Such a wit!
He neglected to mention, of course, that religion is not in
the business of discoveries or accomplishments. Someone who tried to emulate
Jerry’s rhetorical brilliance (tough, very tough) might post the top ten scientific artistic creations of 2012 and the
list would be—empty!
OMG, art is so much better than science!
religion is not in the business of discoveries or accomplishments
ReplyDeleteWell, I'd agree with that. But what business is it in?
top ten scientific artistic creations of 2012 and the list would be—empty!
Nice try, but nobody said religion had to make scientific discoveries or accomplishments. Any discovery or accomplishment at all would be nice.
As for "scientific artistic creations", you're wrong. Try, for example, here and here and here and ...
Jeffrey,
ReplyDeleteYes, fair enough, of course you could probably find scientific contributions to music as well. But of course it would be easy to find religious "accomplishments" too. I could just list things like "advancements in understanding of the religious practices of second temple Judaism" etc. Then we would get in a silly game of "oh not that, that doesn't count." Which would only further illuminate how dumb Coyne's post is.
Why is "advancement in understanding of the religious practices of second temple Judaism" a religious accomplishment and not a historical one? What religious principles, methodology, anything, were used to obtain this accomplishment?
ReplyDeleteJeffrey,
ReplyDeleteSee what I mean? At the intersection of art and science, science gets the credit. I gave an example--the study of 2nd temple Judiasm, that is being motivated largely by its profound implications on Protestantism, and it is all history. You are using a coin with Coyne's head on both sides.
I didn't give anyone any credit at all; I just asked a question. I'll ask it again: What religious principles, methodology, anything, were used to obtain this accomplishment?
ReplyDeleteSaying that "profound implications on [sic] Protestantism" is the motivation is interesting, I suppose, but as irrelevant as claiming that religion deserves the credit for Faraday's work because he was a Christian.
Jeffrey,
ReplyDelete"but as irrelevant as claiming that religion deserves the credit for Faraday's work because he was a Christian."
Not even remotely the same. Faraday (we can presume) did not do his experiments because he was a Christian or to promote a better understanding of Christianity. However, some of the world-class scholars researching first-century Judaism do so precisely because they are Christians and want have an improved context to understand Paul's writings.
Put it differently, if it weren't science we would understand less about magnetic induction. If it weren't for Christianity, we would understand less about 2nd temple Judaism.
Well, I'll ask for a third time: what religious principles or methodology were used for this historical achievement?
ReplyDeleteThe principle and methodology of let's learn as much as we can about the context in which our holy book was written so that we can better understand it.
ReplyDeleteAs I said, we know more about certain things because religion exists. It is at least very plausible that we know more about Koine Greek because of Christianity's deep interest and scholarly work.