Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Professor Wagstaff)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Response to Laura - what is a religion? (off the topic)
Message-ID: <657@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 11-Mar-85 19:20:11 EST
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.657
Posted: Mon Mar 11 19:20:11 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 12-Mar-85 10:14:54 EST
References: <589@pyuxd.UUCP> <5135@utzoo.UUCP>, <617@pyuxd.UUCP> <5176@utzoo.UUCP>, <641@pyuxd.UUCP> <5199@utzoo.UUCP>
Organization: Huxley College
Lines: 32


> Okay. You have proposed a definition of religion. We must dispose of
> it now.

Because you say so?  Sorry, Laura, I'm talking about religion as defined
in the dictionary, meaning a system involving beliefs in "supernatural"
or non-physical entities (whatever that means) of some higher or ultimate
controlling power with a will and the means to exercise that will.  If
you're talking about other systems, then don't argue with me.  I'm not
debating the merits or non-merits of such systems (at this time).  Can't
you please stick to the topic?  Go back three or four iterations and witness
the numerous points in my earlier articles that have gone unanswered because
of this straying from the original topic!!!  Your avoidance of the
original questions almost made me think that maybe you had converted to ...
(No, I won't say it.)

> There is one school of thought that says that physics, biology and
> chemistry (with astronomy) are the only scientists, and ``computer
> scientists'' aren't. Yet I know a lot of computer professionals who
> really think that they are doing science. Is the opinion of the
> ``physics, biology and chemistry only'' crowd to be taken over the
> word of the computer scientists? I suspect not. What we need is
> a definiton of science and then we can figure out if computer
> scientists are doing it.

I've heard it said that any "science" that must include the word "science"
in its name (as if to justify it being called a science), such as "computer
science" or "creation science", is by it very name NOT a science.  Maybe
this is one step in producing such a definition.  :-?
-- 
Life is complex.  It has real and imaginary parts.
					Rich Rosen  ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr