Ceci n'est pas un blog
John Cleese explains the God gene
| Print article | This entry was posted by Anthony on 17 Apr 2009 at 10.23 am, and is filed under Astronomy & Science. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
I am a research fellow in
about 1 year ago
Paul Gardner said, ‘I needed to realize that it was okay to have unanswered questions’, but don’t you think that’s a cop-out?
When science can’t answer something, it keeps at it until it can. Afterall, science is all about ‘finding the answers’.
Is science bigger than God? If anyone’s going to find the answer, don’t you think God is big enough to find it? So when you can’t answer something it makes God look small and John Cleese has a valid point.
about 1 year ago
Hi Dawn – thanks for your comment. I understood Paul Garner (no “d”) as meaning that it is okay to have questions to which we don’t have the answers now, not that we should give up looking for the answers. But if you think he meant something different, why don’t you ask him?
I’m afraid you lost me a bit towards the end…
about 6 months ago
Thanks, Anthony – that’s wonderful!
I think it’s not so much research scientists themselves who express such confidence in an authoritative “view from nowhere”, but the popularisers of science, who have often left research to write books and appear in the media!