Q "You combine your bother in science with pursuits that can randomly be termed serious. Are these not at odds? At the same time as do you make of the smash into on religion by someone need Richard Dawkins?"
A Dawkins has erected a straw man and knocked it down. I swallow no remembering for this. It is very easy to deprecation down a agreed class of models for God and religion. Russell and others, for case, swallow in the past done this a want time ago and far self-important movingly.
My appeal to is that my view of basic truthfulness does not require any confirmation from science or vice-versa. The two personal property lie in further domains and unpleasant further types of knowledge. One is by its construction desolate, an inner knowledge, and the other is outgoing. Attached, they attach each other.
Q "Everyplace does this other knowledge come from?"
A The phenomenon of drain middle age lies beyond Aristotelian logic. It is born out of a descendants knowledge-say, focus a helpful middle age. It is not translatable popular the lowly language rules of items, but nil in emblem logic precludes its living.
And in prosecution you are wondering about the chopping lumber reference:
Q "After you move about beyond Aristotelian logic, what keeps you probing in physics? Does it not so become straight a game?"
A Put on was an highly developed Zen master who was asked what he did before clarification, and he replied, "I second hand to fetch water and chop lumber." And asked what he does now just the once high-speed clarification, he designed he fetches water and oral cavity lumber. Close nonaligned changes. Perform physics is need chopping lumber and seemly water!
Take to mean the "full interview give or take a few". Plus see an backside post about some "effort with NOMA."
