First impression: Neat! Im warming up to this guy. Apparently the Bar-Ilan University delegation to the Pope had a positive influence. Second thought: Hold on. Did the Church just replace one dogma with another? I mean, the headline is crazy. Evolution and Big Bang are right?! Maybe the Pope read Darwin, but now its time for some Popper. ... But I think thats the newpaper, not the Pope. Open questions: Is the Church treating scientific theories in the same way that it treats dogmas? If they are, then why? To what extent are the commitments and methodological entailments of a posteriori knowledge and dogma hostile? Whats this mean for the Churchs relationship to the a priori, in particular to philosophical deduction, Aristotle, and the Aristotelian legacy? When the Church makes a view about the universe as a physical system into dogma, who cares? No, seriously. I mean, are Catholics everywhere now obligated to change their emotional reactions to evolution, the big bang, and creationism? are they obligated to learn up biology and cosmology? does this change the curriculum of Catholic schools? does it have an impact on scientific funding, etc.? Why not simply commit the Church to the open-ended exploration of creation through science? (I mean like, who the hell are we to tell God how to create the world based on our narrow-minded readings?) Sometime post-Galileo, didnt the Church get into science? Like, what about the Jesuits, for example? The article represents this as a shift from Benedicts view, but it also represents Benedicts view as retrograde; so, how much of a shift does this represent?
Posted on: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 08:12:27 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015