Thre is nothing Postmodern in what Ted Davies says, but only an
acknowledgement of the various factors which influence how scientists make
their interpretations. What is indoctrinating to say that htis is the case
as it simply makes us look more closely at the way scientists work. E.g. we
understand Darwin better if you recognsie his religious views , the
political milieu etc. Of course if you follow Jim Moore we can go too far as
he does, but no scientist is a machine for grinding out science, he brings
all the baggage of his culture.
When it comes to the interpretation of the resurrection some are also
cluttered by their cultural baggage, e.g. John spong who will let his wooly
liberal episcopalean perspective colour everything. The classic are the
German criitcs of the 19th century.
Yes scientists (and theologians)are supposed to "interpret data with both
> honesty" but their own worldview can get in the way.
Yes I am inflamed as Ted Davies has been misunderstood and he is not
teaching Postmodernism but simply pointing out the total contexts scientists
work in. I am sorry Gordon
but you have missed the point and have a very simplistic view of how science
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gordon Simons" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "Ted Davis" <email@example.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 2:21 PM
Subject: Re: Pasteur and nature of science
> Ted Davis writes:
> >>I tell my students that scientific knowledge is determined not by
> observations and experiments, but by the outcome of debates about how to
> interpret observations and experiments, and that such debates can be
> influenced by a variety of factors (incl. politics, religion, personality,
> various background beliefs, aesthetic commitments, etc).<<
> Do the parents of your students know that you are indoctrinating their
> children with a post-modern perspective on science?
> If so, do they approve? Or don't they care?
> Are they forewarned, before they send their children to Messiah College,
> that this is what they are purchasing?
> What would you tell a student in your class who then espouses a similar
> view concerning the biblical data surrounding the resurrection of Jesus
> If I ever came to believe what you say about the relationship between
> "observations and experiments" and "scientific knowledge," I would abandon
> my career. I have been taught and believe that data (observations) are
> the life-blood of science, and that I have a moral responsibility to
> handle, report, and, where possible, interpret data with both care and
> (Please don't view this as a flame. Despite my sharply critical response,
> it is a serious posting.)
> Gordon Simons
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 01 2002 - 16:55:50 EST