Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Starboy · 12-18-2002, 12:22 PM

It is important not to confuse the artifact with the explanation. It is a safe bet that everyone agrees there is life on the planet. The dichotomy comes into play when you attempt to explain it. There are two main camps, explanation only based on natural causes, or explanations that include supernatural causes. The natural camp is exclusionary. They do not allow supernatural explanations at all. There could be third camp, perhaps certain fundies fit into this category where only supernatural explanations are allowed, nothing natural. (God did everything.)

Starboy

[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: Starboy ]</p>

Russell E. Rierson · 12-18-2002, 10:23 PM

Another possibility is that time is a closed loop and reality is self creating.

Time would be a curve. The theory of general relativity explains that there does not need to be anything external to our universe. Everything is intrinsic TO the universe.

The radius of curvature would be a huge number, close to infinite, yet alpha and omega would be the same point.

Russ

Kevin · 12-19-2002, 01:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by TealVeal:
<strong>I have tried really hard to figure out if there is some sort of false dichotomy present when creationists say it's either evolution or creationism much like there is a false dichotomy in pascal's wager. Any ideas? I am fresh out

</strong>

It is. For example, while Lamarck's views are generally considered evolutionary, they are definitely inconsistent with modern evolutionary biology. Lamarck not only believed in the inheritance of acquired characteristics, it was his position that there was an evolutionary 'ladder' (his view, not mine) and that animals at the 'base' of the 'ladder' we constantly coming into existence through spontaneous generation, thus Lamarckianism is inconsistent with a pattern of common descent.

Not to mention, there are ranges of creationist positions which are mutually inconsistent (such as old earth creationism and young earth creationism), so even if it were possible to make the simplistic dichotomy between creationism and evolution, there's still a question to be resolved about which creationism that is (and you'd be shocked at the amount of vitriol that subject engenders among their various adherents).

TealVeal · 12-19-2002, 05:26 AM

Thanks for jump starting my brain everybody.

[ December 19, 2002: Message edited by: TealVeal ]</p>

NOGO · 12-20-2002, 08:05 PM

Evolution is not an explanation of why life is on earth.

Evolution is a characteristic of life itself.

As far as I know non-living matter does not evolve but I am willing to be convinced.

Evolution therefore cannot be set against creation in any debate. The reason it is that way is that believers simply do not get it.

Some people believer that God created life ie a miracle outside the norms of nature and some other people believe that life came about ... by accident ... although I don't like to use the word.

Evolution is absolutely contrary to the creation described in the Bible.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-18-2002, 12:22 PM	#11
Starboy Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Tallahassee, FL Reality Adventurer Posts: 5,276	It is important not to confuse the artifact with the explanation. It is a safe bet that everyone agrees there is life on the planet. The dichotomy comes into play when you attempt to explain it. There are two main camps, explanation only based on natural causes, or explanations that include supernatural causes. The natural camp is exclusionary. They do not allow supernatural explanations at all. There could be third camp, perhaps certain fundies fit into this category where only supernatural explanations are allowed, nothing natural. (God did everything.) Starboy [ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: Starboy ]</p>

12-18-2002, 10:23 PM	#12
Russell E. Rierson Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: usa Posts: 31	Another possibility is that time is a closed loop and reality is self creating. Time would be a curve. The theory of general relativity explains that there does not need to be anything external to our universe. Everything is intrinsic TO the universe. The radius of curvature would be a huge number, close to infinite, yet alpha and omega would be the same point. Russ

12-19-2002, 05:26 AM	#14
TealVeal Regular Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: WM Posts: 208	Thanks for jump starting my brain everybody. [ December 19, 2002: Message edited by: TealVeal ]</p>

12-20-2002, 08:05 PM	#15
NOGO Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Canada Posts: 1,562	Evolution is not an explanation of why life is on earth. Evolution is a characteristic of life itself. As far as I know non-living matter does not evolve but I am willing to be convinced. Evolution therefore cannot be set against creation in any debate. The reason it is that way is that believers simply do not get it. Some people believer that God created life ie a miracle outside the norms of nature and some other people believe that life came about ... by accident ... although I don't like to use the word. Evolution is absolutely contrary to the creation described in the Bible.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.