Changes

== Consequences of Dismissing the First Cause ==

== Consequences of Dismissing the First Cause ==

[[Pasteur]] criticized [[positivism|positivist]] [[Auguste Comte]] that his fundamental principle is to dismiss any metaphysical search for first and final causes and to [[reductionism|reduce]] all ideas and all [[theory|theories]] to facts, and to attribute the character of certainty only to demonstrations of experience. Conversely, instead of achieving for scientific rigour, this approach turned out to be an utopia and led Comte to end up with the lack of precision and clarity in stating his doctrine, with doubtful assertions, obscure precepts, and anecdotal examples.<ref name="Debré">{{cite book |title=Louis Pasteur|author=Patrice Debré|publisher=The Johns Hopkins University Press|place=Baltimore and London|year=1998|pages=365-368|isbn=978-0801-865299|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=RzOcl-FLw30C&printsec=frontcover&dq=Patrice+Debre+Louis+Pasteur&hl=sk&sa=X&ei=WpSvUvLLLYXYtAbtwICgBw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Tiger&f=false|quote=}}</ref>

[[Pasteur]] criticized [[positivism|positivist]] [[Auguste Comte]] that his fundamental principle is to dismiss any metaphysical search for first and final causes and to [[reductionism|reduce]] all ideas and all [[theory|theories]] to facts, and to attribute the character of certainty only to demonstrations of experience. Conversely, instead of achieving for scientific rigour, this approach turned out to be an utopia and led Comte to end up with the lack of precision and clarity in stating his doctrine, with doubtful assertions, obscure precepts, and anecdotal examples.<ref name="Debré">{{cite book |title=Louis Pasteur|author=Patrice Debré|publisher=The Johns Hopkins University Press|place=Baltimore and London|year=1998|pages=365-368|isbn=978-0801-865299|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=RzOcl-FLw30C&printsec=frontcover&dq=Patrice+Debre+Louis+Pasteur&hl=sk&sa=X&ei=WpSvUvLLLYXYtAbtwICgBw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Tiger&f=false|quote=}}</ref>

According to [[G.K. Chesterton]], the riddles of God are more satisfying than the solutions of man and the first effect of not believing in God [here as the first cause] is that person is losing the [[common sense]] or according to É.L. Cammaerts starts believing in [[moral relativism|anything]].<ref>See notes in: [[Singularity]]</ref> The similar critique was applied to [[Darwin]] by Adam Sedgwick who in his review of the [[The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection|Origin]] published in the Spectator on 24 March 1860 criticised Darwin's theory for unflinching [[materialism]] and for utterly repudiating final causes.<ref>ibid.</ref> The philosophical positions stemming from this repudiation eventually degenerated into [[scientism]] and attracted totalitarian minds and adherents of radical anticlericalism who blindly sought to impose their own belief systems pertaining to [[morality]] and [[politics]].<ref name="Debré"/>

According to [[G.K. Chesterton]], the riddles of God are more satisfying than the solutions of man and the first effect of not believing in God [here as the first cause] is that person is losing the [[common sense]] or according to É.L. Cammaerts starts believing in [[moral relativism|anything]].<ref>See notes in: [[Singularity]]</ref> The similar critique, published in the Spectator on 24 March 1860, was applied to [[Darwin]] by Adam Sedgwick who in his review of the [[The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection|Origin]] criticized Darwin's theory for unflinching [[materialism]] and for utterly repudiating final causes.<ref>ibid.</ref> The philosophical positions stemming from this repudiation eventually degenerated into [[scientism]] and attracted [[totalitarianism|totalitarian]] minds and adherents of radical anticlericalism who blindly sought to impose their own belief systems pertaining to [[morality]] and [[politics]].<ref name="Debré"/>

== References ==

== References ==