RE: Science, faith, and theists
September 4, 2014 at 11:02 am
(This post was last modified: September 4, 2014 at 11:10 am by The Grand Nudger.)
Again you ask another to do your work and then claim to be generating a hypothesis?
But nevermind, I'll help you. We could take a look at the weeds and see whether or not whatever "causes" them (if we accept this argument) fits our criteria for a "creator". We don;t have to accept cuase or creator, in gathering that data. But, You and I have a cheatsheet in that while we may have had no clue once upon a time, we can clearly say that there are "causes" involved in plant growth. We've looked, we've found.
Yes, I think it's odd. I consider it special pleading writ large, point of fact. I don't think it's odd that you say it, as you've pointed out it's a pretty common line of thought. The most generous thing I could call it is useless dualism..lol. Here we are, talking about "cause" -at the very least - but you're suggesting the means that we have available to us to even make this designation - the principles upon which the very concept is pinned - all of a sudden break down when we approach the sacred cow? They cease to be informative? If you wanted to know what caused weed growth (or tumor growth) - where would you look? What is a cause? How do you know that something has "caused" some other thing? Can you explain any of this in a manner that would be -outside- the purview of science? I doubt it, but I've been wrong before.
But nevermind, I'll help you. We could take a look at the weeds and see whether or not whatever "causes" them (if we accept this argument) fits our criteria for a "creator". We don;t have to accept cuase or creator, in gathering that data. But, You and I have a cheatsheet in that while we may have had no clue once upon a time, we can clearly say that there are "causes" involved in plant growth. We've looked, we've found.
Yes, I think it's odd. I consider it special pleading writ large, point of fact. I don't think it's odd that you say it, as you've pointed out it's a pretty common line of thought. The most generous thing I could call it is useless dualism..lol. Here we are, talking about "cause" -at the very least - but you're suggesting the means that we have available to us to even make this designation - the principles upon which the very concept is pinned - all of a sudden break down when we approach the sacred cow? They cease to be informative? If you wanted to know what caused weed growth (or tumor growth) - where would you look? What is a cause? How do you know that something has "caused" some other thing? Can you explain any of this in a manner that would be -outside- the purview of science? I doubt it, but I've been wrong before.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
