RE: Josh McDowell
August 31, 2011 at 3:17 pm
(This post was last modified: August 31, 2011 at 3:19 pm by Ace Otana.)
(August 31, 2011 at 3:03 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:(August 30, 2011 at 3:00 pm)Ace Otana Wrote: I always use Occam's Razer.You do realise that Father William of Occam was a theologian right Ace? Perhaps there is benefit in thinking outside of proof based disciplines?
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Ge...occam.html
A basic scientific principle.
Doesn't matter who developed the principle. If it works I'll use it. Though I think his own principle goes against his beliefs. Anyway, it was altered and has become a scientific principle.
"one should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything"
Explanation that require the fewest assumptions is most likely correct. Obviously the theologian didn't realise that adding a god into something will mean adding many assumptions. The principle works, that's all that matters. Don't matter who developed it.
"One should not make more assumptions than the minimum needed. "
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.
Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.
You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.
Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.
You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
