Self-Correction

Doug Thomas writes an interesting article in the latest Humanist Network News. He mentions how a British philosopher, Roger Scruton, criticized Richard Dawkins and other atheists because “atheists rely on science to arrive at answers.” Why is this a problem? Scruton says “science is often wrong and to base one’s philosophy on it [is] prone to error as well.”

Thomas goes on to write why science is a positive thing. Science has the benefit of self-correction. Even if something is wrong, it gets corrected through better, more solid evidence.

He writes:

Religion, on the other hand does not tolerate these corrections to errors. We all know that both the Bible and the Quran contain language that incites violence against those who disagree with the prescriptions of truth held therein.

Modern scholars who dismiss these violent writings are in denial, Thomas goes on to say.

He’s right. Science provides us with the most accurate representation of Truth that we have. It doesn’t tell us everything, but what it does tell us is as verified as it an possibly be.

With all we know now, wouldn’t there be plenty of obvious places to update the Bible? Forget the idea that we may not be wise enough to know what everything actually means. Thomas suggests the entire book of Leviticus as one that could use correction.


[tags]Doug Thomas, Humanist Network News, Roger Scruton, Richard Dawkins, atheist, atheism, religion, Christian, Bible, Koran, Quran, science, Leviticus[/tags]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X