I trust science but so did Hitler and Pol Pot

Science can be comforting because it is about some relative certainties . But those certaintes are mostly small ( it can't tell you whether you will be happliy married or not and it doesn't tell you whether you are destined to survive and your brother not )  Should we expect it then to banish all fear and replace religion ;Or will it be used,  like religion can be,  to be a potent poison - a reason to kill your brother . Truth even when it involves science is often much bigger than it .The truth has a way of breaking out of idealism and categorisism and setting us free
It seems the best way to store this dangerous  stuff is to keep the all ingredients of good decsionmaking in seperate places.  Everybody learns best if categories of knowledge are retained and it was good to see this established by discussion on TV last night . This doesn't mean the categories and storesafes  are perfect - just that we can contest boundaries best when we study both individual cells of knowledge and experience and then move onto their overlap areas. There is also no contest if there is only one player ;and only one person controls the conversation.(science , politics religion literature , history)

The ABC's attempt to rerun the false premise that Science gazumps religion and ( philosophy) went bad last night because it allowed its main guest to say that the above ecosystem function principle was no longer valid . Krauss said philosophy provided a bridge to reality testing that is no longer needed .  While his simple premise has always been popular , many scientists,  philosophers or fiction writers DO NOT accept this overly simple idea --- that science will eventually answer all our questions .
One reason most category students  don't accept the over ascendancy of science is because we don't know as much as Krauss says we do - we still need philosophy of some kind to inform the choices and drivers within us . We need some answers NOW  to decide how to resist our hormone drivers ,talk to our children, reform the ecosystem , use welfare  money, deal with disobedient citizens,  who to marry and what work to do. The when and how of community will use both science and world view .
We need values that science struggles to clearly identify. Even Plebechek should realise that the last leaders who took the view advocated by her and Krauss directly justified a curriculum control that allowed some people to kill others;  on the basis of science and science alone ( the survival of the fittest) .Krauss says science has brought only good,  but forgets  about the ends justifying the means Science spells out the logic of production  but does'nt spell out its purpose  If you leave that purpose with the leaders to decide,  they may , as they have done just use it for self centred ends
More reasonable and less fanatical people on the panel say science can be used for good or bad and has been . As Dickson  said,  religion puts a reason brake (what should have been a consensus issue) on some,  who , like little children , use the logic of self preservation to go no further. The reactionaries need a grand philosophy of community to substitute for the Christian one,  but they are unwilling to say what it should be .
The gazumping , even if "the God of the gaps"  closes with time, will not happen because neither science or philosophy can answer all the questions we want answers to . Krauss 's overstating of what science can tell us becomes evident in his distracted talk  of the world shaking significance of flooding islands and ice bergs.
If philosophy teaches us anything,  it  is that politics and right actions are only simple if ethical decisions are simple . Krauss would have been more credible if he recognsed that , like his certainty on what we should do about sea level rise,  advocates of science only solutions were prone to overstate " some certainties"; and even some moral impertives   Clearly, he overstated certainties on the best CC policy, even though he did go beyond ABC policy on the matter.

ANYONE who has studied one discipline has no right to say his discipline is the overridingly important one ---they all are . There are some questions science is good at answering  ( like how much detail about the big bang you can find in a book thats not even focused on it )  but there are some questions microscopes periscopes and telescopes can't seem to answer
Without respecting the boundaries in the Cells of life (  the old buildings at univ, the nature of life ) we can't interact reasonably and responsibly with each other . We trade in the dark as Plato said .  The paradox is that you can't study history and literature , science and faith , literature, art,  and politics  if you don't study them both seperately and together.Greg Hunt made that point very well. You can't progres unless you coalesce
Mark Scott and the Board of the ABC need to ask themselves whether they are part of the education revolution or in need of it .  Their first target for a product  review might be the ageing reactionaries who are becoming fanatical enough to rerun tapes they made 20 years ago , Tapes that to annoy their own former friends,  because those friends , unlike them , have gone ahead and studied the subject more deeply - the philosophical profession and the writing profession.

The evidence on the night was that,  instead of looking like they had a handicap to growth ( "some weird old beliefs") , the majority of Christians and Christian thinkers took a number of study disciplines very seriously  ( and were clearly all over Australia attracting a growing number of unbelieving students to their schools ) .

Before you start a fight,  make sure you are not just punching the air. No need to try and  control the discussion about the truth- it has a habit or breaking out eventually under its own steam.

Lies ,wrongdoing and asking questions

Its the last day of Parliament for 2012 , and it will be dominated by a frustrating war of words that is all the worse for being so personal.  No one wants this sort of nonsense to be the main game in Parliament  and both major parties will be under scrutiny for their clear role in prolonging it . One it seems by asking questions,  and the other for not answering questions.
Whatever comes to light today (29th November 2012) The Prime Ministers and Cabinets reliance on "lawyer speak" ( cf using a variety of language ) goes down badly with those of us who think the matter is about facts ( did Julia write a letter to defend the setting up of a slush fund) and answering questions.WE can all be pedants but no dispute at home resolves if we do that !
As Nixon, the lawyer,  so famously said " Remember you can always say " I don't remember"  and that expression is today---the theme . Similarly saying "I did nothing wrong" ( or the term "no wrongdoing") can be  a legally acceptable  cover for wrongdoing because in the  Western tradition noone is assumed guilty unless proven guilty - because the question has not been put in a court of law ; therefore because there is no court,  there is technically no "wrongdoing ". "Lies" similiarly
The fact that our society at present ,  like many,  before it has lost sight of the basis for its legal principles ( and its very high sensitivity to the extremely delicate matter of knowledge) is no excuse - and only adds to the importance of "answering questions ".( the basis for responsibility - answer- ability)  Infact, the public confusion ( wrong in principle or wrong in law? ) being used to cover the poor use of words by Labor could be considered an abuse of public trust.
The opposition are allowed and even encouraged to ask questions , Those in power don't have to answer them( noone can force anyone to do anything that isn't against the law in this country or ever - we have a wonderful rights and legal system ) , but if they don't , it reflects badly on those in power .
Sending in the troops to defend someone also doesn't work if the person facing a straight accusation doesn't directly answer it themselves ( we are all perosnally responsible for our own actions and how we explain them is our business) - If someone fails to defend themselves against an accusation they are wasting the courts time - given to them in grace and opportunity . There has been a lot of not answering questions  in Parliament-- of various kinds --Labor
I hope Julia did nothing wrong in principle in this case and can legitimately  use the valid excuse of " not knowing ". If she  has done the wrong she's not alone but a  lawyer in her situation has only one option .To use language to answer questions ------not to hide behind language. Plead guilty or not guilty.

Mere words man

Its just not fair ! The girls were miffed that the mouths of the men kept moving without a break ;  the wise women were not being heard , in the end , on The Q&A panel on Monday night. Maybe they had enough sense to stay out of the game going on at that point .
I wouldn't be too worried .  So few know where equality begins and ends and where quality and diversity and unity start . Pedantry abounds and mere words and mere time given to them are a shallow preoccupation,  if you want to get to the big picture.
Because when they spoke,  the women made sense - we remember not how much time you had,  but how well you spoke .Wonderful,  light and clear.
I don't believe in progress as a religion because until our parliamentary put a qualitative filter on the conversation,  men will continue to be think themselves wise for all their words;  and be seen as fools for removing all doubt by using too many .( Kevin Rudd clearly took the cake on the night)
 Kiss is the principle and Concatenation the guide:  Proverbs 11 provides the ground floor of Parliament just as 1 Corinthians and Matthew 11: 25 should echo politely and succinctly around its walls.

Don't be too greek - its likely to set us ALL back a few thousand years.

Real progress is illusive

“When modern sociologists talk of the necessity of accommodating one’s self to the trend of the time, they forget that the trend of the time at its best consists entirely of people who will not accommodate themselves to anything. At its worst it consists of many millions of frightened creatures all accommodating themselves to a trend that is not there.”

- G.K. Chesterton, Heretics
Everyone agrees we need an education revolution in Australia. Greenlabor are afraid that it may only occur if we look more closely at what worked in the past -that's awefully conservative stuff .

ABCTV's reputation on a downhill slide

Re Steam pictures + pollution?  on ABC again today

It would be great in 2020 ,if our once great ABC is still as highly regarded as it has been during its history to date . Some ABC journos are quite happy to risk some of the ABC's hard earned capital ; by carelessly adding adjectives to subjects and images that "say "something that they really don't say . Now in competition with the internet, this is no time for compromise, confusion , preaching or junior school ABC .
As all good Westerners know , the old 8th commandment is not only not known,  but not obeyed by many now whose attitude is " all truth is my truth to tell"  .Worse,"all" means justifying using images and adjectives to carry the case - Mcluhan would have failed some of them . ABC management  need to apply ecological common sense here - short term gain,  long term pain.

The ABC are of course,  like the public,  confused about what is actually coming out of all those stacks some stash infront of us as they try to tell a story about carbon . A proper report on the subject would help!!!!! The product of combustion is actually 2 green house gases . One works against the other so there is some sort of balance that's not talked about. Fortunately,  for all of us, we don't have to follow all the myriad of gas and  electromagnetic equations to decide whether warming will or will not be driven by combustion of composed carbon on earth . We should be free of the stupid fear that just because our car engines are hot the atmosphere will warm . Every night without a fight , the heat it moves off site . We have the history of the earth to tell us the general direction of things but no the media ( how different is the ABC these days ?) captivate and use the people's fear blindly ignoring the need for science ( not talk of what " scientists say" ) to address it . Its about credibility and whose gaining it and whose losing it and who simply is not being heard 
But the ABC don't want to let geologists talk - they disagree with some whose grasp of these issues is through their computers .
Warming , like combustion,  produces more clouds and more rain . That's why kindergarten class run by Flannery have had to move from GW panic to AGW panic to CC panic to get away from their mistaken primary causes . Flannery is of course a father of the year so we hear  - a father of lies? ,because  a good father would confess his mistakes ,  so the family is no longer confused . so should the ABC .

Also , the ABC should stop pushing the story by still calling the 2 products you can see in the picture as pollution . Elementary ecology will tell you that the real wonder of the world is recycling of both. Any politicians or ABC journo who dares mention the word "resilience"  ought to ask themselves whether they really know what it means for the rest of their story - and consult someone who practices in it,  providing real hope for a world of people now in fear of almost any risk or pressure at all .
The real discussion about the real need for a real education revolution has yet to happen.

We maybe alone in the universe,but we may also not be

Whats next in exploring the universe? - the big meet ?The Curiosity is confronted by mere aluminosilicates , the Voyager light years of empty and our place is producing food ,fantasy and fun every second .maybe there is more happening than we will ever see..http://www.terrybisson.com/page6/page6.html

Equality - some marriages could be more equal than others

The farce of the farm continues amongst our leaders with not even a whisper about great literature from any party.
Literature is that stuff that summaries and points to the substance whereas mere science and philosophy is too cumbersome to come to the point quickly and succintly.

There is a saying that s its better to remain silent and be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt . While the polys lapped up the attention this week over talk of their heroes , many of them would have been better off to say nothing . The key offenders revealed that they don't read widely enough and made us think their wisdom comes too much from listening to themselves ( if only) .

John Stuart Mill mentors Hockey and Swan swoons over Springsteen, but no one mentions Orwell.

Those in charge want us to dance again to the animal farm rules of equality. Where all animals talk equality but no one but the pigs in charge know what it really means.  If marriage is to be equal, why can’t a man who can afford them, have as many wives as he likes? And why wouldn’t those of us who insist that marriage best be monogamous be prosecuted for discrimination under equal equality laws? Maybe we live in the land of double speak and just don’t know it?  The older children are certainly in charge, but will the children of the future be discriminated against in a world where even “mum” and “dad” mean different things to different people

 Hockey won the point with  us /many by putting John Stuart Mills name forward as a great thinker of his time. If we are to reach young people,  it seems to me a testimony that relates to the present is critical . Would the mere mention of Galbraith , Ghandi  or Mandella have gazumped the dance 
party atmosphere by those who are now just playing around  ?