(May 12, 2011 at 1:52 am)Statler Waldorf Wrote:(May 12, 2011 at 1:42 am)SleepingDemon Wrote: Hmm nice. Don't take that to mean anything more than it is though. Life having no purpose may answer the question, however it is simply the neutral position. Life has no purpose until someone discovers one. (If it exists.) And thank you. I'm not the type that resorts to namecalling during a discussion. And while I am a goldfish in philosophy, I am a shark in theological debates. ;-)
Oh that's cool, I taught debate for a little bit, had a lot of fun doing it. Well I don't believe you can logically have such a thing as a "neutral" position when it comes to theological matters I am afraid. It really is one of the most brilliant aspects of the Bible; it effectively cut out any middle ground logically. If it really was written by just dumb sheep herders and fisherman they seemed to have a pretty advanced understanding of logical argumentation. :-)
A little off topic but do you believe science has limitations?
Erm, how is "God did it" a logical argument?
Science is only as limited as the creative imagination of the person using it.
'The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and seal. It could not be expressed better.'
-- Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens
"I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the scriptures, but with experiments, demonstrations, and observations".
- Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
"In short, Meyer has shown that his first disastrous book was not a fluke: he is capable of going into any field in which he has no training or research experience and botching it just as badly as he did molecular biology. As I've written before, if you are a complete amateur and don't understand a subject, don't demonstrate the Dunning-Kruger effect by writing a book about it and proving your ignorance to everyone else! "
- Dr. Donald Prothero
-- Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens
"I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the scriptures, but with experiments, demonstrations, and observations".
- Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
"In short, Meyer has shown that his first disastrous book was not a fluke: he is capable of going into any field in which he has no training or research experience and botching it just as badly as he did molecular biology. As I've written before, if you are a complete amateur and don't understand a subject, don't demonstrate the Dunning-Kruger effect by writing a book about it and proving your ignorance to everyone else! "
- Dr. Donald Prothero
