On Mike Tan’s speech to the 2009 science class of UP
April 26th, 2009 by blackshama
The University of the Philippines College of Science (UPCS) in Diliman yesterday held its recognition ceremonies honouring the class of 2009. The UPCS was founded in 1983 with the split of the College of Arts and Sciences into colleges of science, arts and letters and social sciences and philosophy. In the past two years, social scientists have been invited to give the commencement speech. Last year it was bu sociologist Randy David, and this year was by anthropologist Mike Tan ( I will post the speech once the UPCS has it on its website) .
While Randy David’s 2008 speech dealt with philosophical convergence between the natural and social sciences (which only those who have read a bit of philosophy of science may appreciate fully), Mike Tan’s speech touched on science and religion, first in the global context and in the Philippine context. No serious Filipino academic in the social and natural sciences has ever done this.
Tan’s thesis is that the Filipino is inherently religious and this allows him/her to . But since Tan cited Darwin so many times, I am tempted to believe that Tan subscribes to the Darwinian thesis that religion evolved as a result of natural selection.
Since Tan deals with anthropology of health issues, he is the right man to say that the inherent religiosity of the people gives fitness to survive in a changing environment. With a disaster prone geography, Filipinos will probably need RELIGION more than people in the West today.But religion as an adaptation giving fitness is still the subject of research. Science advanced in the West as society began to empirically understand natural phenomena. Reductionism allowed for a greater confidence in predicting outcomes. But in an age of observable within a lifetime climate change, will the West get that “old time religion” back?
This is what Tan challenges the 2009 science class. How can science and religion work out in Pinoy society for the better? What he calls as “religious exceptionalism” (Tan doesn’t want to use the F word ! not the 4 letter one but Fundamentalism) seems to be a foreign import. The majority Catholic Philippines is a unique case in evangelization history. Very few friars were martyred in the Philippines as compared in other Asian countries. The evangelization of the Philippines occured rapidly. Was it that Filipinos were not prone to exceptionalism? Some historians of religion cite that the inciepient monotheism inherent in Filipinos made it easier for the friars.
Tan also cites the obvious fact that religion “preserved” the knowledge needed for science to develop. I found Tan’s discourse on the matter very interestung for he started out with Islam and how it preserved Greek knowledge in mathematics. medicine and astronomy that would have been lost to the West. The Roman Catholic Church benefited from this and Science (which the UPCS is heir to) is a Daughter of the Roman Church. The Roman Church’s thesis is that you need reason and faith to understand the cosmos. For this reason, the Roman Catholic Church is the only religious organization today that has an academy of science under the Pope’s patronage.
And so back to Darwin, Einstein and Galileo. All of them had run afoul of religious exceptionalism in their time. But all of them saw something Divine in the natural phenomena they sought to explain.
With a more pluralistic society evolving in the Philippines, Tan says that the exceptionalists are getting louder. What scientists in the Philippines have to do is to get into the talk!
If Mike continues with this line of academic inquiry, he could be the perfect counterfoil to Richard Dawkins!
BTW, graduation ceremonies are one of the best venues for the public to be appraised of developments in the state of Philippine science. Dean Caesar Saloma appraised the audience on the challenges of the College of Science. While UPCS has made great strides in graduate training in the sciences, there is still much to be desired. According to Saloma, the college graduates only 13-14 PhDs per year. Given that the college has many PhDs, it should be churning out at least 70 a year. To speed up national development, all of our higher educational institutions should have at least 1/3 of their faculty as PhD holders. There is a need really.
I think one reason is that our infrastructure development has lagged behind faculty development. One of reasons why young PhDs leave is that they can’t find a lab to work in. The on-going construction of the National Science Complex in Diliman should answer much of that need.
April 26, 2009 at 1:19 pm
If it works for them, then so be it.
It still does not change the logical position that we don't know what's out there.
And not knowing what's out there, the rational position ought to be to examine the evidence instead of positing as truth, something which has yet to be proven.
The various religions preserved knowledge which they saw as beneficial to their interests – and burned everything else. Of particular interest is the burning of the "pagan temples" that included the Library of Alexandria as commanded by the Christian Emperor Theodosius.
The Catholic church has too many instances of selective memory, it is totally duplicitous, manipulative, scheming. A development which has left the Catholic churches of Europe empty and hallow as secularism advances.
Meanwhile the PI wants to be more popish than the pope and demonstrates its Catholicism by the extent of its dysfunctionality, corruption, dogmatism that make Pole Alexander de Borgia (and his nuns and priest cavorting in sensual delights in the Vatican) look like a middle school freshman. Good luck!
April 26, 2009 at 8:42 pm
"The Catholic church has too many instances of selective memory, it is totally duplicitous, manipulative, scheming. "
what is one example of the RCC's selective memory?
April 26, 2009 at 11:14 pm
Watabawt child molestations that they knew that they did not want to divulge until the clamors of victims.
Watabawt the trainer of priest who molested fellow priests in the Vatican that Herr Ratzinger knew before he became papa sa roma? The molested priests resigned in a huff. Do we know about it? That's another selective memory …
April 27, 2009 at 10:34 am
what about the catholic church eradication of the balarila? strikes close to home!
April 27, 2009 at 4:30 am
Of particular interest is the burning of the "pagan temples" that included the Library of Alexandria as commanded by the Christian Emperor Theodosius.
Talk about selective memory. The burining of the library is a matter of controversy among historians since there are records that it was burned at least 4 different times by four different 'arsonists', one of whom was Theodosius. I suggest we be more careful with facts lest we be accused of mouthing (or copying and pasting) propaganda.
April 27, 2009 at 10:49 am
Replies that do not answer the core question are red herrings.
The source has nothing to do with it. The burning of the library of Alexandria might have been done four times, but of those four – was Theodosius, that's a fact – even if you copy and paste – it is still a fact and does not negate the fact.
April 26, 2009 at 8:29 am
Sometimes I find it incomprehensible this alleged incipient monotheism of Filipinos vis a vis equally incipient tribal culture which explains why in the political realm, we can produce instant political groups. Or is it because, all 'other religions' came late in the day?
As regard PhDs, is there still any department at UP that does not churn out PhDs simply because its faculty are non-PhDs especially in the social sciences? The reason I ask this is that I find it rather oblique for teachers in a graduate program possibly teaching subjects to doctoral students when they themselves have only an MA to their name. This is not to undermine them of course.
April 26, 2009 at 10:08 am
Most of the UP Diliman departments and colleges have enough PhDs to administer doctoral programs. However, the problem is that you need at least 5 full time PhDs to have a program. In many departments, that magic number is hard to maintain as the young PhDs really don't stay. In one social science department where I taught as an affiliate, the chair every year has to look for new PhDs. The problem stems from academic politics to the pathetic low pay assistant profs get.
The 5 PhDs is what CHED requires before a PhD program can be accredited. That's why even our leading universities (Ateneo, DLSU, UST etc) don't have many PhD programs due to a lack of PhD supervisors. For example, Ateneo offers about 10 PhD programs, 4 of which are in the sciences. DLSU also offers about the same number in the sciences even if DLSU has 21 doctoral programs and UST has 20. Ateneo,UST and DLSU are comprehensive universities and in research universities, each major discipline offers a doctoral program, from music, arts to sciences and engineering. I estimate that at least 30% of your faculty must have PhDs in order for kickstarting advancement in research and teaching.
As for non-PhDs administering a doctoral program, CHED strictly requires that 5 PhD criterion, so that is not the case in the UP system. What CHED is concerned about is professors with master's degrees administering master's programs. This may result in substandard programs. Ideally, masters can examine undergraduates and doctors can examine masters and doctoral candidates. UP still has some way to go before all its professors have doctoral degrees. If I'm not wrong Diliman and UPLB has passed the 50% mark but the other campuses still have some way to go.
April 26, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Blackshama,
The religiosity of the Filipino is self-evident. But the argument presented by Mr. Tan that it is "inherent" in the Filipino is hard to swallow. There is a simpler explanation: 350 years in a Spanish convent and 50 years in Hollywood. Also anthropology is probably about as soft a science as one can find, and Michael Tan's positions over the years have only deepened this impression. For example he advocates teaching mathematics in any old local language because he thinks they are all equally good, pointing to studies conducted specifically to prove that point. Anthropology has really gone off the rails at the UP.
April 26, 2009 at 1:25 pm
Anthropology as "soft" science: Probably, archaeology has left the marriage in a civil divorce in UP. The archeologists continue to woo the natural scientists!
Actually what interests me is that the pre Hispanic Pinoys got Christianized so easily. Islam had more time but when the Boxer codex was written, the writer just noted that Pinoys just imbibed the surface of Islam. One anthropologist told me that Islam's biggest cultural impact on Filipinos is hidden by male underwear. Today circumcision is performed on everywhere on Pinoy boys at 12-13 as in Islamic practice. The Boxer codex notes that at that time not all boys were circumcised. The Spanish friars tried to stop the "heathen" practice but had to give up!
April 26, 2009 at 3:02 pm
I am inclined to take the view that the pre-hispanic residents of the island resisted fiercely – for example Lapu-Lapu (a Tausug chieftain) killing Magellan.
Or the three hundred years of resistance of the Bangsa Moro and the Igorot Nation rejected Christianity at the onset. Even Rajah Soliman, the Islamic chieftain of Manila resisted fiercely.
Though, other chieftains surrendered not by virtue of the cross – but by the sword. Let us remember that the Spanish conquistadores introduced Christianity through the sword and their main goal was really to look for spices and gold and colonies.
Islam was introduced differently. The site <a href=”http://www.islamic-world.net/islamic-state/islam_…” target=”_blank”>http://www.islamic-world.net/islamic-state/islam_… accessed Apr, 26, 2009 provides the following details not known to the average Catholic or Christian in the Philippines.
In contrast, Islam's entry in the Philippines was through trade, intermarriage, and cultural relations; Christianity's entry was BLOODY, MURDEROUS, and ETHNOCIDAL – Filipinos did not adopt to Christianity easily, rather, Filipinos adopted to Christianity under duress and paid with their blood.
April 26, 2009 at 1:31 pm
Blackshama,
The idea that religion "preserved the knowledge needed for science to develop" demeans both science and religion. I think that Science evolved out of Religion. Religion WAS science during the fearful childhood of our species. But today, Religion stands in relation to Science, as Alchemy does to Biochemisty, and Astrology does to Astrophysics, or the Common Ancestor does to chimpanzees and human beings.
This attempt of Michael Tan to establish some kind of parity between the two is simply futile and wishful, sentimental thinking to an age not so long ago, when we could afford to be liberal and tolerant of religious falsehoods, myths and delusions.
I believe that now the survival of the human race depends on scientific reason, data and methods. That we cannot afford the luxury of the inchoate, philosophical, anthropological and simply erroneous modes of thinking that generally fall under the label "religious" — except perhaps as recreation (in the best sense of the word) or entertainment (in its worst).
But let not our public schools, nor their products be guided by these questionable, if charming, perorations of Michael Tan about Science and Religion achieving some kind of detente. They simply cannot, at least within the sphere that Democracy defines.
April 27, 2009 at 5:29 am
I believe that now the survival of the human race depends on scientific reason, data and methods.
No kidding? We're back to our old discussion. You believe democracy is vital to the survival of our civilization, yes? Where is the scientific data and methods that support this assumption? Where is the scientific data that says I am not permitted to, for instance, simply assemble an army and conquer other countries, in light of, say, Darwinian evolution? Weed out the weak ones and all that. If you can derive an 'ought' from an 'is' what is your scientific basis for doing so?
The survival and destruction of the human race is not the purview of science since science can just as well save us as to destroy us all, and to impute some sort of magical powers to science is misleading. Science is a tool. In the right hands it's a boon, and in the wrong hands, a bane. And where should those who wield this tool get their, for want of a better word, morals? Darwin?
September 2, 2009 at 1:07 am
I agree with you that there is a fundamental divide between positive facts and normative statements.
But am I correct in reading between the lines of your comment the suggestion that religion is the best, if not the only, possible fount of morality? I hope I am wrong in this, but if I am right, let me say now that nothing can be farther from the truth. Morality is only within the reach of the heretic and the skeptic, for the dogmatist, believing she already has possession of “the Truth”, will not strive for it any more but will even shun the core of any sensible morality – doubt. (If religious and dogmatic people are not so sure about many things, I’m sure they wouldn’t have committed the atrocities they have in history.)
And by the way, there is a fundamental error in one of Tan’s main point; he said that “religion is wrong only when it becomes exclusivist.” But Christianity is exclusivist. If it will allow other routes to salvation, it will violated Christ’s own words, “I am the way, the truth and the life: no one cometh to the Father BUT BY ME,” not to mention a lot of what Paul said. So there you have it, the founders of Christianity are exclusivists and, in the case of Saul of Tarsus and Titus, dogmatists. What’s to stop other Christians from following their example? Or are we to twist the words of Scriptures to fit the liberal spirit of the times? Personally, I’m fine with that.
April 26, 2009 at 7:09 pm
parang may kulang sa second paragraph?
"Tan’s thesis is that the Filipino is inherently religious and this allows him/her to ."
allows what?
April 27, 2009 at 10:44 am
Inherently religious?
Nah.300 years spent in a Spanish petri dish, kneeling like pathetic dumbells – it's like breeding a species that says "how high" whenever a colonizers say "jump".
April 26, 2009 at 7:21 pm
Religion has a part in the history of mankind , and in our civilization. But too much emphasis on Religion
will stagnate our thinking. Before, the Church declared the Sun revolves around the Earth. Anybody declaring
otherwise runs the risk of being burned on the Stake. The Great Astronomer Galileo, found the the Earth
revolves around the Sun. He was declared a Heretic. Was almost burned on the Stake, until he recanted as
the church required.
Too much belief on the Devil, led to Religious Inquisitions and Tortures. Science and Technology can work
side by side with Religion. You can believe in a Creator. At the same time, we understand his creations.
The Holy Books never touch anything about Dinosaurs, and other prehistoric animals. Yet, their bones are
everywhere. Archeology shows we have advanced civilizations, before our written civilization. We can see
the ruins everywhere thruout the world. Yet, the Holy Books never touch the subject. We must accept the
truth as it is. Not sanitized by Religion.
April 26, 2009 at 7:33 pm
Amen, Tas. AMEN TO YOU AND TO US!!!!! Religion and science is like oil and water that do not mix.
Religion kills curiousity because the answer is supposedly definitevely there ….in the mahal naa bibliya … What is there more to think? If you think otherwise the Vatican will send his cavalry of assasins or politely speaking, ex-communicators … HA!HA!HA!HA!
April 26, 2009 at 7:33 pm
"If Mike continues with this line of academic inquiry, he could be the perfect counterfoil to Richard Dawkins!"
Counterfoiling Richard Dawkins?
Meaning foregoing science..?
and pursuing Intelligent Design instead??
Hahahaha….!!!!
No wonder science in the Pilipins is in jurassic stage….
April 26, 2009 at 8:12 pm
fLIPPinos are still waiting for God's Miracle for higher iQ for the past 480 years … and all we get are excuses, excuses, excuses ………… plenty of excuses …….
April 26, 2009 at 7:37 pm
I've gone to plenty of blogs you can count with your fingers … it seems the sanest and logical bloggers are the atheists. While religious bloggers are ovverly boring and illogical ….
Mike Tan is a typical Pilifino who claimed there's a separation between the state and the church … but his slip is showing … Mike Tan cannot separate his stae of mind from science … The way things are going FlipLand can never be like China who walk the halls of Jet Propulsion Lab and Nuclear research facility in Los Alamos and CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research ….
…. Oh I see several FlipPinos … I saw plenty … in the back lot, back officd and floor managers … squabbling, quarelling, back stabbing discussing deeper science of who'll be the president Noli or Legarda !!! HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!
April 27, 2009 at 2:01 pm
renato: But didn't you say in an earlier blogthread that you believe in God? Wait… what you said was
I believe in God if God makes Philippines a safe place . . . . and Filipinos has proven that God do not exist.. I guess you'll never believe in God in your lifetime, as peace ain't coming while there still are followers of the religion with "…. strap on a bomb …. virgins await" blabber down Mindanao where the trade-mindset includes kidnapping.
April 27, 2009 at 3:24 pm
At the moment I don't believe in God … I'll choose a God who can top Muslim's 72 virgins, a mansion, army of naked houselslaves …
I'm for sale … to the highest bidder …. eh, God? You hear me?
OK, Gods, bid starts now!
April 26, 2009 at 9:48 pm
who are you to make that "judgment, punk? first learn to make coherent arguments, bago ka sumali sa siriosong usapan.
April 26, 2009 at 11:11 pm
Mike Tan is not intelligently designed species …
April 27, 2009 at 3:23 pm
To all US based readers and presupposed FlipAms
According to a good friend of mine who is a Sabadista who heard Mike Tan (he had a daughter graduate cum laude)
You need the likes of Mike Tan to remind you for the judgement of God is upon the United States of America (via pigs from Mejico!) and will spill out into Canada for 1) Obama, Pelosi and all likeminded Democrats pro culture of death, 2) The abomination of Gay marriage is made law 3) Capitalist greed
So Ato Pacifico, maybe United States Americans are in need of a miracle! Manumbalik kayo sa Diyos as DJB's Catholic Taliban says!
United States scientists if they can't deal with the swine flu threat will bring out the medieval in you!
How the medieval is brought out by purely a natural event that follows Darwinian principles is quite interesting from a scientific point of view!
April 27, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Flips already judged by God for the past 480 years and still counting. You people in America says you are blessed because you are in AMerica. So we, the 89,000,000 million Flips, are not blessed because we are not in America.
C'mon, Blackshama. We already have swine flu since time immemorial since time I can remember. They are called the Blessed Politicians. God protects the Blessed Politicians from impeachment and incanceration. Thanks to their prayers and stolen money, they're able to go to Jerusalem to atone for their sins and tithe big time in the tune of 10%. While we unblessed Flip left-behinds can only afford one peso not enough for the wine off the dirty hands of the priests …
April 27, 2009 at 5:29 pm
America has no state-sponsored religion. Roman Catholic covertly state-sponsored. We are still left-behind while America is gazillion light-years ahead in economy. FlipLand is still in medieval era. Who still believe in God's miracle, gremlins, tarot readers, quack doctors and sigbin …
April 28, 2009 at 3:14 am
i confess i don't understand what you just said
April 27, 2009 at 4:01 pm
Swine flu is not a judgment of god.
It is a virus.
To thwart a virus – you need a vaccine shot, not an imaginary friend.
April 27, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Poor people in America are now plagued by swine flu because of Blackshama's God. Despite, people are still lining up in American embassy. They'd rather die of swine flu in America than die of swine in the FlipLand … :)
April 28, 2009 at 4:59 am
My goodness, Renato, when people die of disease you believe in God, you attributed the disease to God's making. Most times you don't believe there is God. You are not consistent, man. And you are quite insistent you are a logical commenter? Can you blame Manoy Bencard for being pissed at you?
April 28, 2009 at 5:59 am
I use the same excuse as the catholics and Vaticans use.
If FlipPnos work hard and nothing comes out of it and question why Vatican and God and god-beievers blame FlipPinos as not doing more than enough. If FlipPinos work hard and succeeds God taketh away the credit.
April 29, 2009 at 3:08 am
Jeg,
The quote from me that you present states that our survival depends on "scientific reason, data and methods." Why do you say I believe it is democracy that is vital. Science did not invent democracy as such, though of course the freedom needed to do science is the same freedom that inspires independence and peace. Both are effects of a successful evolutionary track that certain human societies took, instead of some other.
Human survival is itself a prime directive type of value. If humans "ought" to survive it is necessary that they know what "IS". I concede what is necessary is not often sufficient, though my argument now is really that Religion is not necessary, whereas Science definitely is.
Morality itself, as I have declared recently, is the purview of Democracy, which has no theology, is not allowed to choose a theology because there are so many.
Thus, it appears that Religion without Science is neither sufficient nor necessary to human survival. Perhaps it was in the past, but not any more.
There is simply no parity between Science and Religion. The latter is going out. It is obsolete. That does not mean human beings will lose their sense of awe and wonder at the Universe, or stop being philosophical, deep and moral. It's just that they won't use the Crutch of Illogical Faith and Superstition.
April 29, 2009 at 3:13 am
Blackshama,
Glad you brought up the Fil-Ams because I think they are the living proof against Michael Tan's assertion of a inherent religiosityin Filipinos. By and large 2nd generation Filipinos are no longer the superstitious lot that their parents often are.
Besides, it seems to me that "religiosity" is the effect of childhood mental abuse, indoctrination and brain washing that goes on in private Catholic schools, and really, even in the public schools.
Kids who grow up in secular societies turn out in more balanced distributions with many being non believers in organized religion.
April 27, 2009 at 5:36 am
i thought bong's quote was about theology, matters of science and faith.
April 27, 2009 at 11:02 am
No reason to be defensive, BongV. And what core question are you talkiing about? I was correcting an impression you were giving that Theodosius destroyed the library, a fact which is in dispute. Maybe he did, maybe he didnt.
In any case, what's your core question? Maybe I can address it.
April 27, 2009 at 11:54 am
Jeg:
None to be defensive about. While such fact is being disputed, it is but one of many facts singled out.
In the context of this specific thread's beginnings, the core issue is the statement "that religion “preserved” the knowledge needed for science to develop.".
While it may be factually, true that religion, specifically the Catholic Church preserved some of the knowledge. It also destroyed other knowledge that it felt did not jive with dogma. As to whether the knowledge was science or not – we will never know, after all it was destroyed by the Catholic church – for instance the, the conquistadores acting in behalf of the crown and the papacy ravaged Central and South America for its gold, and obliterated Mayans (and their knowledge) along the way. Or something closer to home, eradicated the balarila.
Moreover, science as a process of discovery has a momentum of its own. It may have common roots with religion in the sense that it seeks to answer life's big questions> However, the pathways diverge when superstitious faith tries to impose itself on logic, reason, and evidence – and often to very dire results for those who don't stick to dogma – Copernicus and Galileo most notably.
Thus to say that religion preserved the knowledge for science is only partially correct, because religion also destroyed knowledge and deprived science of such knowledge. And to top it off, religion has sought to quell science (and knowledge) when science does not agree with religious dogma.
April 28, 2009 at 2:57 am
balarila? the alphabet? in what sense does the alphabet (not) preserves the catholic church's interests?
what are the catholic church's interests? as opposed to spain's interests?
April 28, 2009 at 3:00 am
i still don't understand why its " selective memory, it is totally duplicitous, manipulative, scheming"
is any of what you said, " selective memory, it is totally duplicitous, manipulative, scheming"?
April 28, 2009 at 3:19 am
Comment too long daw. Sorry for splitting the comment:
While such fact is being disputed, it is but one of many facts singled out.
Yes, but you left the dispute out of your comment. I won't go so far as to say it was disingenuous of you though. Maybe you were just repeating something you heard or read. No worries. The comment thread is a self-correcting entity.
April 28, 2009 at 3:20 am
the core issue is the statement "that religion “preserved” the knowledge needed for science to develop.".
While I agree to a certain extent that religious people caused some knowledge to be destroyed or at least to go underground, it is misleading to think that this travesty is a monopoly of the Catholics, as book burning and banning occurs even in atheistic states like China, North Korea, Cuba, the former Soviet Union, and others. In fact the Catholics recently scrapped their list of banned books in 1966 so there's some progress there. Islam's preservation of classical thought also made the renaissance possible when classical thought was forced into the outskirts of Christendom, mainly preserved by monks in Ireland.
April 28, 2009 at 3:22 am
However, the pathways diverge when superstitious faith tries to impose itself on logic, reason, and evidence – and often to very dire results for those who don't stick to dogma – Copernicus and Galileo most notably.
Galileo was already discussed extensively in another post by Blackshama. It is propaganda — the kind you find in Dawkins's site, I gather — to think that Galileo was persecuted because of dogma. In fact, Bellarmine, his 'prosecutor' wrote that if Galileo could prove his theory, Church teaching will have to change. Galileo couldnt prove it, proof being a requirement of science at that time and in our time as well. Anyway, use the search thing. …
April 28, 2009 at 3:23 am
…And again I find it ironic that you use words like logic, reason, and evidence to endorse your worldview. Logic and reason are fine for other things like philosophy, but science demands — demands — evidence. Where is the actual scientific evidence for the the creation of new species through random mutation and natural selection? It is supported by logic and reason, sure. But where is the scientific evidence? Where is the evidence of the multiple universes that you espoused in another thread? Dawkins in his book endorsed this bit of pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo. Im sure youre familiar with his central trainwreck, I mean, thesis: the universe is so complex that it's unlikely. It follows that the Creator has to be more complex than the universe and is therefore more unlikely. (Logical red flags right there, but anyway…) And his solution? Something even more complex and unlikely like infinite universes.
April 28, 2009 at 6:35 am
you are at the same time both head and tail, Renato. too much 'pekeng periodista' made you one already, heheh.
April 28, 2009 at 2:04 pm
If only catholics will have the same constant excuse instead of vaccilation and blame-game. If only god believers answer my prayers not make me work. If only bible don't work as Philippine law books. If only god's punishment is predictable, fair and sane more than Philippine punishment. If only ……. if only ….. PROBLEM WITH GOD punishment is IT'S EITHER OR or AND/OR or WHATEVER depending on God if he's having a bad day or dismienoria …
IF YOU DON'T HEAR FROM ME, GOD SENT HIS ASSASINS. I Know you know that can never happen. I'm here as instrument of your punishment by God. I don't know what you did but God made me a troll to torment you. Deal with it. If you don't like me … YOU DON'T LIKE GOD!
Weeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!
April 28, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Not really, the core contention involves "preserving the knowledge needed for science to develop".
While it is true that atheistic states have burned books, accounts of party members reporting on the type of books being burned were religious books that had clearly no "knowledge needed for science to develop". Burning religious books does not destroy "knowledge needed for science to develop".
April 29, 2009 at 4:38 am
yeah, the cycle of knowledge creation happens all over, by all groups. in fact, it can be argued that 'churning' of ideas over historical time is critical.
April 28, 2009 at 4:25 pm
Jeg:
This recent rejoinders of the Catholic Church are revisionist in nature.
It is ironic for the Church to demand proof of Galileo's theory when the entire essence of the Church is built around an unproven assumption of a deity.
April 28, 2009 at 4:27 pm
There is nothing complex about infinite universes – there is more complexity and mumbo jumbo in trying to justify a single universe.
Akin to a discussion on flat earth and round earth – where flat earth is synonymous to single universe and round earth is multiple universes.
As to the proof and evidence, use the search function look up the thesis and dissertation and deliberations in the scientific journals – not a theology journal.
April 29, 2009 at 4:36 am
yeah, for these new physics theories, its harder to provide evidence.
April 29, 2009 at 1:37 am
GabbyD:
It is "selective memory" because said institution only selects the memories which present itself as preserving scientific knowledge. What's not being said or presented are "memories" of destroying knowledge that had scientific applications (such as herbal remedies) because it is "witchcraft". And history chronicles what happened to those accused of "witchcraft".
Duplicitous, manipulative, and scheming because, at a global level its frequent interventions in actions that allowed it to advance at the expense of other belief systems not just through the cross but with the sword as well. Locally, the duplicity is best described by Jose Rizal in his novel Noli Me Tangere – which cost Rizal his life as well.
April 29, 2009 at 4:31 am
OK. i'm not sure the wods "duplicitous, manipulative and scheming" is the right word. quite frankly, its giving the roman catholic church too much credit.
arguably, alot of the actions that have been attributed to the roman church actually served the countries that used it as an excuse. for the philippines, i'd blame spain specifically for abuses.
Generically, some colonial powers sucked (spain is the worst), and some didn't (england is arguablly the best).
to prove that the roman church is guilt for being "duplicitous… etc", they had to have spearheaded these thing.
at worst, they didn't stop it. but that doesn't make the church evil. it means the church is/was weak, beholden to earthly political powers.
RE: selective memory
i dunno about the "selects the memories about preserving scientific knowledge" part. all knowledge is set aside, for new knowledge. science does it as well…
why is it that the roman church is suddenly the caretaker of ALL knowledge. that is a huge burden to bear, no institution will ever successfully do that.
i think the EX POST expectation that all knowledge should be preserved is too high a standard for anything.
Example: from this point on, do we expect literally everything that exists now will still be around 100 years from now?
what about the notion of progress?
April 29, 2009 at 4:32 am
yeah, i agree. the church has made mistakes, but its also done good too.
April 29, 2009 at 12:03 pm
it depends on the specific theory.
September 2, 2009 at 1:15 am
Hi BongV. Can I point you to the direction of the pinoyatheist mailing list and the Filipino Freethinkers Forum blog, or have you already found your way?