Alas, it ain't as simple as that. For if the teaching of an aspect of science contradicts freedom of religious exercise, the School Board finds itself in a court case. There's a very fine essay on this by Maya Nomi Stolzenberg in an issue of Harvard Law Review. But I remain slothfully on holidays until next Monday and can't find the will to track it down. She shows quite convincingly, I believe, that US Supreme Court Justices do not inhabit that office in virtue of any philosophical ability or acumen. (But I'm sure Obama will soon add some much needed philosophical rigor to that august deliberative chamber.) Btw, a colleague of mine wonders whether the idea of "the will" is not the product of some sort of conceptual confusion or libational hallucination. After all, if the Greeks couldn't see it, why should we? He admits that we have a capacity to choose but wonders what "the will" could mean above and beyond this clear and obvious capacity for choice. Clearly, he lives only to create problems for Kantian moral theorists. Walter O MUN Quoting Eric Yost <mr.eric.yost@xxxxxxxxx>: > >>Secular Humanism indeed! > > > > Feyerabend-esque reply: we are allowed separation > of church and state, but NOT separation of state > and science. > > _The End of Science: Facing the Limits of > Knowledge in the Twilight of Scientific Discovery_ > by John Horgan. (Addison-Wesley) makes for a good > read. Contains interviews with Popper, Kuhn, and > of course, Feyerabend. > > E > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html > ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html