Political compass for the21st century

[Eric the Green]

(07-10-2021, 07:04 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(07-09-2021, 04:15 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I am not of the persuasion that science should remain pure, objectivist, positivist, mechanical and determinist. Science essentially seeks the truth, and so as it evolves further in human society, it will converge with religion, while religion is undergoing the same process and is converging with science.

The issue then is to keep the integrity of both intact, while still realizing that the one truth and the one reality involves both. It can be a delicate balancing act. Both modern advanced science and mystical religion involves some achievement of skill and practice or initiation that is no casual or superficial matter. Teaching young earth creationism represents religion before modern evolution in society, and so can't converge with science and should not be taught as science. Purely determinist science also remains incompatible with religion or mysticism, and can't or shouldn't be allowed in church. But more-evolved kinds of religion or mysticism may indeed be combined with science in some modern, post-modern and new-age theories, and vice-versa.

I think you misunderstand the concept of science.  Science has a theoretical and experimental dichotomy that tends to confuse people not part of the enterprise.  If practiced as intended, the theoreticians propose ideas that need to be supported or debunked, and the experimentalists take on the task of do just that.  Rarely do individuals operate in both arenas.  Ideally, the two disparate branches operate in tension, making the validation process less suspectible to manipulation.  It's not a perfect model of inquiry, but no other has been shown to be better.

It's better, but depending on the object (or subject) of study. I don't think I misunderstand science. But I am aware of fields where science is not the best method of study, although it can still be applied. Are you identifying my discussion of mysticism and religion above with "theory" in science? I would not identify those two concepts.

A theory in science refers to specific well-defined questions asked of the phenomenal world, with the aim of being able to demonstrate it empirically and experimentally. What I referred to in my post above was more philosophical, a question of worldview. All scientists, mystics, artists as well as philosophers being a worldview to the table, either examined or not.