The sentence against Socrates |
In several
previous articles I have warned about some of the dangers that are just now
threatening the advancement of science, which has proceeded for over
two centuries and a half. One of the most important is the dominance reached by
certain ideologies with great political influence, that when their ideas are
attacked on scientific grounds are oblivious to what science says, or just call
it pseudoscience.
- It is a scientifically undisputed fact that the life of a human being begins at the fertilization of an egg by a spermatozoon. Despite what certain politicians and journalists say, there are no discussions on this issue in the scientific world. In a previous article I have summarized the scientific consensus, which has been unanimous for over a century and a half. Nevertheless, the proponents of a certain radical feminist ideology proclaim a right to abortion which in fact is the right to kill their children. If these abhorrent laws hold, it is due to the cowardice of the rulers, who do not dare to repeal it. The result is a step back in the defense of human rights. We are going back to the Middle Ages, when parents had the right of life and death over their children (this right is now granted to mothers). We are going back to slavery, when some human beings (the masters) had the right of life and death over others (the slaves). We are going back to the Roman Empire, when abortion and infanticide were legal until 24 hours after birth. Is this what they call progress? I would rather call it going backwards.
- Another dominant ideology, the gender
ideology, is based on scientifically
absurd premises, such as the claim that the sex of each person has no
relation to genes and body building. To disguise the fallacy, they call
sex gender, a purely
grammatical concept that has nothing to do with sex, although they sometimes
coincide. Advocates of this anti-scientific ideology are snatching from parents
their constitutional right to the education of their
children, by imposing in schools the teaching of their
ideology: another action which no ruler dares to oppose.
- When a state legislation imposes on schools
the prohibition of teaching the theory of evolution, or the obligation to
offer as an alternative the creation of the world in six days, or any
other nonscientific theory, scientists protest, and it is right that they do
so. Thanks to this, all these laws are sooner or later repealed by higher
authorities.
- All these aberrations are possible as a
result of the predominance of another ideology (relativism), which holds
that truth is an outmoded
concept, because there are no absolute truths, everyone can choose their
own; the idea that truth and falsehood, good and evil, are malleable; that
parliaments have the right to decide by majority on scientific truth, or on
the definition of good and evil. The height of absurdity is that such a
right is claimed by members of Congresses whose scientific knowledge is often
practically nil.
There are no absolute truths
C.S.Lewis |
Let us
consider this. Assume it is not an absolute truth. Then why should we accept
it? Assume it is an absolute truth. Then it would clearly be false (a contradiction),
for there would exist at least an absolute truth.
If these
ideologies are imposed, it will mean the end of science and the beginning of
what C.S.Lewis called the abolition of man.
Against this, the following two statements seem to me obvious:
- A scientist is required to defend scientific truth against any ideological imposition, of whatever sign.
- A parliament exceeds its functions if it denies the right of living to any group, or if it handles scientific issues outside its competence, such as the definition of a human being. Any day
they will repeal quantum mechanics or relativity theory.
A single glaring error discredits a government, as
happened in Athens with the sentence
against Socrates, which discredited Athenian democracy forever.
Our governments and parliaments could make history for reasons precisely opposite
to their expectations.
Manuel Alfonseca
No comments:
Post a Comment