April 16, 1996
Hon. Antonin Scalia UNITED STATE SUPREME COURT Washington, D.C.
The Washington Post entitles a recent article of theirs "Justice Preaches To Christians `Ignore `scorn'." They referred to a recent talk you gave to the Christian Legal Society. I feel obliged to submit some comments which reflect my background in Technocracy Inc., an educational research organization.
You are credited with using such expressions as "worldly wise" and "sophisticated world." They also quote you, "they [the worldly wise] just will not have anything to do with miracles."
A point on wisdom and knowledge from my perspective: Wisdom belongs to ancient times. Solomon et al. were wise men. They arrived at their wisdom by logic, polemics, sophistry, rhetoric, debate, etc. They interpretated miracles based on this procedure and people altered their lives according to the beliefs these wise men accorded to miracles.
By contrast, Albert Einstein et al. were/are not wise men. They were/are knowledgeable men, they were/are men of science. They arrive(d) at knowledge--establishing facts--by the scientific method.
The difference between the two groups cannot be over emphasized. The former group never has/had to furnish proof for their wisdom. The latter has/had to establish proof beyond any reasonable doubt. This group constantly "fine tunes" facts. The former group was/is passive while the latter was/is dynamic.
Men of science--ignoring miracles--are responsible for huge changes in our lifestyle. Prior to our age of science, our nation was a primitive, agrarian society. Production was by cottage industry, using guild craftsmanship. In those days people fetched water from their wells, chopped fire wood for their wood-burning stoves, shoed horses, etc. Families had spinning wheels in their parlor room; as a rule, clothes were home made, not store-bought. Stockings were darned and clothes mended; never thrown away until they were thread-worn.
This primitive, agrarian age was a slow-pace age, an age of relative subjective ignorance. Society lacked an understanding of the physical universe - physics, chemistry, biology, etc. It was an ignorant age, not by choice but by circumstance.
To a great extent, people relied on the interpretation of miracles by wise men and made decisions accordingly. No other course was opened for them. Since the age was slow-paced, when mistakes were made--and many were--no serious damage ensued.
Our age of science is vastly different. Our age is fast-paced and mistakes do serious damage. Our age is an age of specialists and, to a large degree, we have lost "independence." With the loss of independence, we gained "liberty."
One example of our loss and gain will suffice. In the primitive age, people could vote for the person(s) to built roads for their vehicles of transportation--the ox cart and then the wagon. If a mistake was made, the age was so slow-paced, that no serious damage was done.
Today roads are built by experts - engineers. The public is not qualified to chose them; they cannot vote on this matter. A bureaucracy is set up to make this decision. So what do we gain when we lost a voting privilege? We are the most mobile society ever known.
We only need to go back to George Washington's days of the primitive agrarian age for comparison. When Washington went to his first inauguration, from where he lived to Philadelphia--it took him seven days by carriage, a distance of 215 miles. On any of our interstate highways, a person can go that same distance in about 3 1/2 hours. That gives some indication of the difference between the past, slow-paced, primitive age and our advanced age of science.
Although we live in the age of science, we find ourselves with huge problems that seemingly defy solution. Detailing them is far beyond the scope of a letter. We will solve them, however, by more science, not less. An attempt to solve them by following the wisdom of "wise men" will be futile.
As to the application of more science, Technocracy proposes the first order of the day is to discard our present socioeconomic structure, our "Price System." Technocracy takes this position because this structure, which dates from antiquity, is the antithesis of science. Its continued use in our age of science bodes serious complications. It puts our age in a position of being terminated. Technocracy proposes that we replace our present structure with its Technological Social Design. This Design is built on science and is in sync with our modern, scientific, technological age.
Those who take the time to study Technocracy's concepts will be exhilarated to know we have at our finger tips the capability of bringing into existence the greatest society ever known to humankind. Literature is readily available.
Throughout my life I have corresponded with a variety of distinguished people such as yourself. This correspondence has been one of my greatest joys. Would you not agree that exchanging of ideas makes for progress? I am 83. Please hurry your comments along to me.
Your very truly,
John A. Taube
Your e-mail comments are encouraged...
E-mail me by clicking here. I will try to answer all e-mail sent to me on this Web Page.
My phone and number and fax are the same: 415-334-3733
Go to Home Page Go to Main Menu Page