The Forum > Article Comments > The Edith Trilogy and rationalism > Comments
The Edith Trilogy and rationalism : Comments
By Peter Sellick, published 2/3/2012Edith Berry shows how rationality alone is inadequate to the challenges of transforming the world.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- Page 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
-
- All
Posted by Daffy Duck, Friday, 2 March 2012 9:47:26 AM
| |
It's interesting that it was the UN through it's inspectors that acted as an impediment to the U.S.'s push for the invasion and destruction of Iraq.
George W. Bush, however, cited his messages from "God" as a powerful impulse to override the rational conclusions of the inspectors and invade anyway. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/oct/07/iraq.usa Posted by Poirot, Friday, 2 March 2012 9:49:53 AM
| |
*ultimately there really are no rules, there is no better (or worse), and nothing really matters.*
The problem JP, is that this also creates a wonderful feeding ground for religious snake oil salesmen, to then claim only they know what matters. I think I'll stick to the rational. Posted by Yabby, Friday, 2 March 2012 10:30:12 AM
| |
The mind has some terrible limitations. As in, it cannot. Necessary as rationalism is for survival, reason isn’t everything. In the big picture, it is a small ingredient. Merely an asset, a monkey tool.
Posted by Geoff of Perth, Friday, 2 March 2012 10:38:25 AM
| |
Had you considered, Jon J, that the article merely had a typo and should have read "a horrid one night stand with a Canberra bureaucrat"?
I hesitate to suggest a correction to Pericles' comments... But after, "Christian faith good; rationalist faith bad" wouldn't "Both based on the antics of colourfully-drawn characters in works of fiction" have been more accurate? Maybe I'm doing Mr Sellick a disservice in imagining he yearns for a return to the irrationalist days which must have been 'adequate to the challenges of transforming the world' of, say, Oliver Cromwell? Maybe not? Posted by WmTrevor, Friday, 2 March 2012 11:31:17 AM
| |
It also just occurred to me that Frank Moorhouse is (or was) sexually active and openly bisexual, so presumably by Peter's standards he's a miserable sinner and can't possibly have anything useful or important to say about anything. You should be out stoning him to death, Peter, not praising his fiction.
Posted by Jon J, Friday, 2 March 2012 11:46:59 AM
|
Right-wing or "conservative" Christians have always beaten the drums of war very loudly. They still do so. One such war drum beater was featured on yesterdays forum.