Dawkins's fine book Unweaving the Rainbow addresses much the same worry of the humanist/liberal artsy-fartsy types, who think science rapes the mystery and mystique out of beauty.

<link>

<link>

That's an attitude that gets us nowhere. It has nothing to recommend it but its sybaritic autoeroticism masquerading as tinhorn mysticism. It always comes down to wallowing in the dark like kids under a quilt with a flashlight. But that's sort of attitude is nothing less than the deification of ignorance

"To surrender to ignorance and call it God has always been premature, and it remains premature today." -- Isaac Asimov

Hi MC, Dawkin’s book -The Ancestor’s Tale - was an excellent response to Keats. It was a brilliant book, my favorite on evolution, and simply Chauceresque.

I'm confused by what you are claiming. How does it respond to Keats at all? Keats believed in the "Grand March of the Intellect", a societal and human intellectual progression forward that comes from the views expressed by Erasmus Darwin, you know, the grandfather of Charles Darwin. Erasmus wrote about the evolution and development of societal mankind. Keats, along with most Romantics, believed in what he wrote.

Hi San, you may be right. I’m just repeating what I heard (from the link provided by MC):

Re: Keats

His starting point is John Keats' well-known accusation that Isaac Newton destroyed the beauty of the rainbow by explaining it. The agenda of the book is to show the reader that science does not destroy, but rather discovers poetry in the patterns of nature.

If I’m wrong, I apologize, disregard the Keats reference.

Alta Quies - The ultimate "scientific conclusion".

georoses:

Alta Quies - The ultimate "scientific conclusion".

Hi georoses, I need some help on this one. Le poesie religiose/Alta Quies ??

I don’t get it.

Anyway, are you allowed to listen to music on the Books Fray?