apologies for cross-posting, but...

one of the idiot editorialists at the NYTimes is writing about including
mention of "god" in the pledge of allegiance, but he makes comments about
"secular social sciences" which i thought need to be shared
"Whether you believe in God or not, the Bible and commentaries on the Bible
can be read as instructions about what human beings are like and how they
are likely to behave. Moreover, this biblical wisdom is deeper and more
accurate than the wisdom offered by the secular social sciences, which often
treat human beings as soulless utility-maximizers, or as members of this or
that demographic group or class.

"Whether the topic is welfare, education, the regulation of biotechnology or
even the war on terrorism, biblical wisdom may offer something that secular
thinking does not - not pat answers, but a way to think about things."

the whole editorial is at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/23/opinion/23BROO.html?hp

is this just me, or is this surreal or what? am i mistaken, or don't social
sciences offer "a way to think about things"?
but i like knowing that we're obviously wasting our time (& lots of someone
else's money), since all we need to know about human behaviour is to be
found in the bible, and much more accurately than we've ever been able to
attain with our stats, theoretical modelling, etc.
and the beauty is, he doesn't have to offer any proof to his assertions!
long live scholasticism!


geoff carver - SUNY buffalo

 <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]

http://www.thememoryhole.org/memoryblog/ <http://www.doyouknow.org/>
<http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/>
<http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpeg/PIA05380.jpg>