Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Michaelmas' Asteroid ?

Expand Messages
  • holderlin66
    ...are we to find reflections of our inner selves by contemplating rocks from outer space? Bradford comments; There is a difference between sweet thoughts
    Message 1 of 1 , Oct 4, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      "...are we to find reflections of our inner selves by contemplating
      rocks from outer space?"

      Bradford comments;

      There is a difference between sweet thoughts and Michael thoughts.
      Here is a case in point. There is of course a serious issue here.
      But the potency of how to direct ones gaze with the help of
      Spiritual Science into the structure of matter, comets, historical
      flybys of various astroids and the like, or measuring the reason for
      the positions of the orbits of the planets and the making of how our
      Solar system is also the structure of our inner being, is so beyond
      the sweet intelligence of the brightest of the bright that one has
      to ask, why, why in heaven's name would anyone choose to dither
      around with anything but Spiritual Science if this is the best they
      can do.

      http://www.sobran.com/columns/2004/040902.shtml

      "Will's column celebrates the Genesis program, whose name signifies
      the search for clues from Mars, the planet believed most similar to
      Earth, as to the origins of life. As Will puts it, "How did matter,
      which is what we are, become conscious, then curious? Not all clues
      can be found on Earth."

      Will laments "deepening public indifference" to the space program,
      which he lyrically calls "government at its best." The Genesis
      mission promises no less than an "understanding of how we came to
      be.... It is noble to strive to go beyond the book of Genesis and
      other poetry, to scientific evidence about our origins, and perhaps
      destiny."

      Strange talk from a noted conservative. It's a far cry from the
      views of John Locke, Thomas Jefferson, or for that matter Edmund
      Burke — heck, Karl Marx — on the role of government in human
      affairs. Will also assumes a materialistic philosophy of human
      existence itself. "Government at its best" should "go beyond the
      Book of Genesis and other poetry."

      In The Abolition of Man, C.S. Lewis observed that the modern
      schoolboy is conditioned to take one side in a controversy which he
      has not learned to recognize as a controversy at all. That is, he is
      trained to assume a materialist and Darwinian outlook, without
      realizing that materialism and Darwinism have been subject to
      thoughtful criticisms from their first appearance.

      Will, the son of a distinguished philosopher, should know this. He
      seems to have come a long way from his view of "statecraft as
      soulcraft." Or maybe not. Maybe the ultimate in "soulcraft" is
      explaining away the soul as the product of mere evolving matter. In
      any case, he hasn't wavered in his view that old limitations on the
      role of the state are passé.

      If this view is "conservative," what on earth can the word mean? The
      space program is fascinating, all right, but is it really the job of
      government? Why? Does the government's role now extend to unlocking
      the ultimate mysteries of life, thereby supplanting centuries of
      theology and philosophy with samples of rocks and gases from other
      planets?

      If anything is passé, it's this goggle-eyed worship of physical
      science. Physical scientists themselves are far from unanimous about
      materialism as well as Darwinism. If the public has lost interest in
      space exploration, the likely reason is that we sense that its
      importance to our lives — and particularly to our defense — has been
      vastly overblown. Will is unusual, not to say eccentric, in
      continuing to regard it with a quasi-religious awe.

      To expect physical science to crack the secrets of the soul is to
      commit what some philosophers would call "a category mistake." Like
      Hamlet pondering Yorick's skull, are we to find reflections of our
      inner selves by contemplating rocks from outer space?

      "Knowledge, tickled from the heavens, is the business of a small
      band of explainers," namely, the government scientists of the space
      program, Will says lyrically. But this begs some very large
      questions. Why not hire government theologians and philosophers to
      chip in their two-cents' worth as well? Isn't knowledge
      their "business" too?

      Presumably theology and philosophy don't count as "knowledge," to
      Will's way of thinking, but are mere "poetry," less reliable than
      what government-funded physical scientists may tickle out of the
      heavens. Implicit in his panegyric to science is the faith of modern
      secularism: that "knowledge" doesn't include anything our Creator
      may have revealed to us.

      Joseph Sobran
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.