[unspun]

I haven't been tracing along with this conversation lately, but noticed this last page.

This ranking looks to be just a superficial way to give a weather forecast of the trustworthiness of the practitioners and the doctrines they spout, eh? --nevermind the results they get and how they fit into reality realized.

It's interesting, but no substitute for maintaining a well accepted systematic perspective and filtering various theoriticians' theories and "scientists'" "facts" through that.

For that, there is no substitute for possessing a firm foundation of what one knows and especially of what is most important to know, no matter how that knowledge is gained.

That doesn't mean that someone who accepts the truth about matters having to do with Eternity thus knows how to do genetic engineering, but it does help him healthily outlast such things as genes and incidentally helps him know what one should and should not do with them, while he has feet for Earth.

That's what I'd say, if I did.

[unspun]

That order also speaks more about the kinds of things being studied and how we should consider knowledge about those subjects.

When a discipline involves predicting the behavior of people, for example, it is not as often as dependable as when a discipline predicts the behavior of their atoms, eh?

[betty boop]

unspun, in this matter you are "preaching to the choir." :^)

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your post and for sharing your views!

My list was limited to science disciplines. In my view, science deals with facts whereas truth is the domain of the spirit. Truth is never threatened by inquiry.