04-22-2007, 10:54 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-SwamyG+Apr 21 2007, 09:25 PM-->QUOTE(SwamyG @ Apr 21 2007, 09:25 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Obviously in a skeptic's mind the question comes is if the usage of camphor was a case of serendipity? Or was it used knowing fully well the properties of it (like the case where we use odomos knowing that it is supposed to be a mosquito repellent)?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Is there a need for every human action to have 1) a rational basis? 2) a scientific basis?
An American behaviorist BF Skinner tried to explain religion and superstition on the basis of his experiments on pigeons. While Skinner's experiment was undoubtedly elegant it can hardly be considered as explaining the human situation in its completeness. The commonest counter-reaction to such Skinner-like explanations is to try to justify scientific basis for religious performance. This is common amongst modern Hindus. But we really need to sit back and ask the above questions. We should also explore the possibility of purely naturalistic explanations of a non-Skinnerian type. While Hindu science definitely arose out of the Hindu religion, we need not try to see scientific justification for all and sundry.
Though many scientists of the Abrahmistic cultures imagine that their religious constructs favored the emergence of science, the case which can be made for Hindu-s is much stronger than theirs.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Is there a need for every human action to have 1) a rational basis? 2) a scientific basis?
An American behaviorist BF Skinner tried to explain religion and superstition on the basis of his experiments on pigeons. While Skinner's experiment was undoubtedly elegant it can hardly be considered as explaining the human situation in its completeness. The commonest counter-reaction to such Skinner-like explanations is to try to justify scientific basis for religious performance. This is common amongst modern Hindus. But we really need to sit back and ask the above questions. We should also explore the possibility of purely naturalistic explanations of a non-Skinnerian type. While Hindu science definitely arose out of the Hindu religion, we need not try to see scientific justification for all and sundry.
Though many scientists of the Abrahmistic cultures imagine that their religious constructs favored the emergence of science, the case which can be made for Hindu-s is much stronger than theirs.