Latest post in my blog on popular science:
Pathological science, wishful science, or ironic science?
https://populscience.blogspot.com/2023/05/pathological-science-wishful-science-or.html
Regards,
But Manuel, Langmuir’s five symptoms of pathological science are critical of that kind of “science” in almost exactly the same manner and points in which I am critical of how some Christians advocate for belief in pathological “miracles,” with the prime icase being the recently discussed Fatima events. The interpretations of the circumstances and particulars surrounding those events, and their interpretation, match almost EXACTLY the five symptoms!
But I don’t suppose you want to “go there” again…
Regards,
Michael
Thank you, Manuel, for another thought-provoking blog post. The erosion of public faith in science keeps growing for these reasons and others (science wedded to big money or big power).
Lewis says while we should believe that miracles can occur, we should be skeptical of reported instances of miracles. In fact, the church investigates reported instances of miracles thoroughly, exercising her own justifiable caution. But at some point, once the investigations are done, we must give our fellow Christians the benefit of the doubt whether we “see” or not.
Who am I to judge at what points or in what manner the Lord feeds new information into the natural world? That He does so is certain. When and how, well, those claimed instances need to be investigated to be sure.
Blessings,
Ruby
| Michael_Nicholson Lord High Heretic
June 15 |
- | - |
But Manuel, Langmuir’s five symptoms of pathological science are critical of that kind of “science” in almost exactly the same manner and points in which I am critical of how some Christians advocate for belief in pathological “miracles,” with the prime icase being the recently discussed Fatima events. The interpretations of the circumstances and particulars surrounding those events, and their interpretation, match almost EXACTLY the five symptoms!
Yes, Mike, you are right: Langmuir five symptoms should be considered not just in science, but in any form of knowledge. This is the reason why the Church (as Ruby has pointed out) “investigates reported instances of miracles thoroughly, exercising her own justifiable caution.”
This is actually done: for instance, the case of Medjugorje has still not been decided, even though it took place first 42 years ago.
But, as Ruby also said, “at some point, once the investigations are done, we must give our fellow Christians the benefit of the doubt whether we “see” or not.” This is also applicable to scientific theories. For instance, the existence of gravitational waves was discussed for about a century before they were finally discovered. And there are other cases, even more to the point, such as the Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.
But I don’t suppose you want to “go there” again…
You are right here too. I’d rather not start all over again with the previous discussion.
Regards,
But if Fatima has been “decided” it has been decided prematurely! The proof is most certainly not in! If anything is certain about Fatima, it is that the five symptoms of Langmuir apply to this very day.
A new article in National Review is interesting and well-written concerning a new book that speaks to how the world wide struggles of good vs evil in 1941 led Lewis to tackle the epic and difficult tale that is Perelandra (Lewis’s favorite book, by some accounts).
I have (I hope) included a link to the article. The Book by James Como is titled : Mystical Perelandra: My Lifelong Reading of C. S. Lewis and His Favorite Book.
Has anyone read the book?
Michael
Lord High Heretic of SpareOom
[
