Über Glauben und Wissen – Irrwege und Irrsinn:
Wissenschaft zeigt nicht, was wahr ist und was falsch. Wissenschaft schließt, anhand von Evidenz, was am wahrscheinlichsten wahr sein könnte.
Das Baumlamm kannte ich noch nicht (s. Wikipedia):
Other writers cite ancient Talmudic traditions, which tell of the Jeduah, described by rabbinical scholars as a plant-animal like a lamb which is tethered to the ground by a sort of umbilical cord, and which can only eat what vegetation is within reach of the cord. […]
In a variation, the Jedoui takes human form and is similarly grounded by its navel – it is a savage beast which kills anyone it can reach and can only be killed by severing the cord with an arrow or dart. Jedoui means ‘wizard’ and is the same wizard mentioned in Leviticus XIX 31, “Regard not them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after wizards, to be defiled by them: I am the LORD your God”; the bones of the Jedoui were placed in the mouth and immediately one was endowed with the gift of prophecy.
It had a head, yes, ears, and all other parts a newly born lamb. …For myself, although I hadpreviously regarded these Borametz as fabulous, the accounts of it were confirmed to me by so many persons of credence that I thought it right to describe it.
Erinnert mich an Karl May. Und Wilhelm von Humboldt.
Mir kam der Gedanke, dass man es sich als Wissenschaftler ganz schön einfach machen kann, indem man seine Subjektivität aus der Beobachtung rausnimmt und sagen kann: „Ich bin fein raus.“ Die Fragen sind nur: Geht das wirklich? Duldet die Wahrheit ein Subjekt? Erträgt die Antwort die Frage?
Siehe auch: Atheisten sind aber gläubig und Frage / question.