Quote:
Originally Posted by lunulae
well, why don't most scientist believe in ethnicity? there must be some rational explaination. or perhaps they are aware of the different races, but don't see it as a neccessity to keep them seperated and preserved.
my biggest problem right now is the apparent globalistic and internationalistic thought of (secular) humanism that stands as a direct opposite to nationalism. i just want to know why these scientists, biologists etcetera think the world would be better place as just one nation; earth. and my other problem is technology. seems like they put all their energy into science's prevail without thinking about aesthetics. for what is the world without aesthetics?
i agree that technology has given us many good things but i also feel it doesn't correlate with my romantic view of life. it is these dichotomies that ultimately confuses me the most.
|
Lunulae, don't be confused with the fact that some scientists are against nationalism and ethnic preservation and favour a world state. I mean, so what? They are not some high priests and unquestionable authorities that must be trusted in just about everything they say. If someone is an expert in molecular biology, it does just mean that his views have to be taken into consideration when molecular biology is concerned and not when policy is concerned. The modern West tends to make a fetish, a religion out of science and that is called scientism and scientism is not scientific at all.
Exactly my thought concerning aesthetics: aesthetics have been neglected in favour of technological efficiency. That has gone too far and now we have a gneralized reign of ugliness in the modern world.
And as for those, whom you call, "secular humanists", who are in fact vulgar materialists and view man as a mere machine and - what is much worse - want to shove their superstitious views down everybody's throat, for them I feel just scorn and don't think they could be an authority in politics whatsoever (although they may have some merits in their respective fields of scientific research).
In fact, you don't have to think that your views on life are somehow "romantic" or "unrealistic" as opposed to theirs which are - supposedly - very realistic. It is them who are naive and unrealistic, because they tend to view everything in oversimplified schemes and reduce relations between humans to purely mechanic principles, while people like you ask deeper questions and try to think life in all of its beautiful complexity.