Science and love, music, art, etc. (The limitations of science)

by George Jelliss , Crewe, Friday, February 20, 2009, 18:52 (5552 days ago) @ dhw

DHW writes: /// the emphasis is on the active role of the perceiver. /// Rubin's famous figure-ground vase is particularly interesting for us, since it presents two entirely different images (like theism and atheism). - This seems to be saying that theism and atheism are equally sound views of the world, like the two interpretations of tne vase/faces image. But this is a false analogy. It is not a 50/50 choice. The atheist, being a realist sees that the diagram can be interpreted as either a vase or a pair of faces. The theist sees things that are not there. The atheist sees the spots and that they can be joined up conceptually to form a triangle. The theist insists that the triangle is more real than the spots. - DHW says: You have foregrounded some of my examples in accordance with your own pattern, and have backgrounded others (i.e. people who believe that everything can be explained in material terms and accordingly try to deny any evidence to the contrary). - I do not deny evidence of the "paranormal" I just say it is weak, weak, weak, and hardly worth bothering with when compared to the evidence for the "normal". Vague things are naturally placed in the background, like mist. - DHW says: There are theist scientists and atheist scientists, all studying the same realities and forming their different Gestalten by supplying their different links. - Theist scientists like Francis Collins or Kenneth Miller by and large keep their religion and science in separate compartments. Their attempts to reconcile their religious views with their understanding of science are individual and different, and not part of science. - See the link I will be posting on the Science v Religion thread.

--
GPJ