FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-13-2002, 09:00 PM   #591
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Coast. Australia.
Posts: 5,455
Post

This thread is a totally different topic with every page, and sometimes every post.

... It is also older than my registration by five months!

Someone should at least agree what the topic of this thread is.
Doubting Didymus is offline  
Old 11-13-2002, 10:48 PM   #592
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington, the least religious state
Posts: 5,334
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Doubting Didymus:
<strong>This thread is a totally different topic with every page, and sometimes every post.

... It is also older than my registration by five months!

Someone should at least agree what the topic of this thread is.</strong>
The UBB stress test thread.
Happy Wonderer is offline  
Old 11-14-2002, 08:09 AM   #593
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Just another hick from the sticks.
Posts: 1,108
Post

It is the story without end, and thus it should remain.

I've read the whole $%@@*! thing and even participated in it, here and there. Sez I, leave it where it is as a monument to <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> .

Ya gotta love it.

doov
Duvenoy is offline  
Old 11-14-2002, 08:20 AM   #594
pz
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Morris, MN
Posts: 3,341
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Duvenoy:
<strong>It is the story without end, and thus it should remain.

I've read the whole $%@@*! thing and even participated in it, here and there. Sez I, leave it where it is as a monument to <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> .

Ya gotta love it.</strong>
No, I don't -- I cringe every time I see it pop up to the top of the list again after a long hiatus. It's just so amorphous, and the topic title is so vague and useless.

The content is inoffensive and mostly on-topic, though, so that there isn't much that could be done. I wonder, though, if the main participants wouldn't be willing to voluntarily abandon this thread and start up new one(s) with a better focus?
pz is offline  
Old 11-14-2002, 12:03 PM   #595
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Just another hick from the sticks.
Posts: 1,108
Post

Quote:
The content is inoffensive and mostly on-topic, though, so that there isn't much that could be done. I wonder, though, if the main participants wouldn't be willing to voluntarily abandon this thread and start up new one(s) with a better focus?
Perhaps, if Ed can be convinced (Good luck!).

If so, I for one, will miss it. Even though I no longer juice my ulcer by participating in it, I enjoy the read. It's almost like one of those everlasting, shit-kicking serials we kids used to be addicted to in the late '40s, early '50s. What's gonna happen next? How will Hop-a-Long Cassidy get out of this one?

Evolution rules!! There, back on topic.



doov
Duvenoy is offline  
Old 11-18-2002, 08:17 PM   #596
Ed
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: SC
Posts: 5,908
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by lpetrich:
<strong>
Ed:
Because in addition to nature, the Bible is also God's revelation to humans. So we have to interpret one with the help of the other.

lp: I don't give any special privileges to the Bible; I'm not afraid of concluding that it is in error.
I was referring to Christians, since we know that the Christian God exists, we know that it is not in error but our interpretations could be in error.


Quote:
LP:
(Ed on how Xianity was allegedly big on natural law for most of its history...)
Because for most of the history of Christianity, it's the miracle-working that had been emphasized.
Ed:
No, this has been the understanding of the scriptures since the time of Job. Hardly after the fact.

lp: A rewrite of history that would make a Stalinist proud. Jesus Christ was described as having worked numerous miracles -- and the same is true of essentially every saint. In fact, the Church only recognizes saints that have supposedly worked miracles. Furthermore, the Bible is not very good at recognizing natural law as a general principle.
Yes, but if you look at the entire time period the bible covers (possibly 15 billion years) the number of miracles is relatively small. The bible does refer to orderly natural laws, read Gen. 8:22, Psalm 148, and Jeremiah 33:25 among others.


Quote:
lp: As to the development of science, it took up where ancient Greece had left off, and most of the ancient Greek scientists had never heard of Jesus Christ!
Ed:
No, the greeks and Aristotle had a pantheistic view of nature. Planets, for example, were seen as having an inner intelligence that induced them to move.

lp: How is that pantheism? Seems like Ed is bragging about what a godless, materialistic, mechanistic worldview he holds, in which Mr. G. is like someone who winds up a wind-up toy, with the Universe being that toy.
Pantheism believes that an intelligence, god, is a part of everything. Actually except for rare miracles that is similar to what biblical christianity teaches, read some of Isaac Newtons writings.


Quote:
Ed:
Christianity allowed for the development of the inductive method.

lp: What brand of it? Ed, you would have been burned at the stake as a heretic during most of the centuries of Xianity.
Primarily Protestantism, that is why experimental science truly flourished after the Reformation.


Quote:
Ed:
Also in a pagan or polytheistic world saw its gods often engaged in jealous irrational behavior in a world that was nonrational, thereby making any systematic investigation of the world seem futile. ...

lp: Sort of like belief in miracle-working and sorcery.
Hardly, belief in the biblical understanding of miracles does not equate to a chaotic and irrational world.

Quote:
lp: Ed had made the comment that no other worldviews feature an objectively real and orderly universe. That comment suggests rather extreme ignorance of other worldviews on the part of Ed.
Ed:
Maybe I should qualify it by saying no major worldview prior to the 15th century except Christianity. And the 16th and 17th centuries is when experimental science came into fullness.

lp: But why did it take so long to happen? Why wasn't the New Testament filled with experiments and induction? Why didn't the Church Fathers carry on an active scientific-research program?
Because early on their primary duty was the growth of the church. They decided that once some societies were developed on biblical principles then there was time to make the society reflect those principles in other areas besides church growth and evangelism. But it wasnt really planned it just happened spontaneously among believers around Europe, especially once the scriptures were widely desiminated after the Reformation.


Quote:
LP:
Sir Francis Bacon's writings have a cover-one's-rear-end quality, ...
Ed:
And what might lp mean by cover ones rear end quality?

lp: Protecting oneself. Sir Francis Bacon was suspected of being an atheist, and he felt compelled to deny that. And he could have gotten in deep trouble if he had publicly claimed to be an atheist -- he could have been imprisoned or compelled to recant or even burned at the stake.
Evidence {}.


Quote:
Ed:
Newton nevertheless believed the key aspects of Christianity that brought about science.

lp: But why did he keep his mouth shut in public about his theological beliefs, O Ed? Threatening to burn people at the stake for believing some supposed heresy, as was the case during much of Xianity's history, is not exactly in the spirit of open-minded inquiry.
Actually by the time of Newton in England there was no longer much of that going on. But they had no problem with inquiring into pretty much anything in God's creation.


Quote:
Ed:
And Galileo's claim is the same as mine and most evangelical Christians today, ie the bible is not a science text.

lp: So the early chapters of Genesis are NOT literal history?</strong>
No, they are literal history but some of the terms are not as specific as a science text.
Ed is offline  
Old 11-18-2002, 08:32 PM   #597
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Lebanon, OR, USA
Posts: 16,829
Post

Quote:
Ed on the Bible:
I was referring to Christians, since we know that the Christian God exists, we know that it is not in error but our interpretations could be in error.
A rather strong claim; you may want to read the "Biblical Errancy" pages in this site's Library section.

Quote:
lp: (Jesus Christ and medieval saints working miracles)
Ed:
Yes, but if you look at the entire time period the bible covers (possibly 15 billion years) the number of miracles is relatively small. ...
Xian apologists are now trying to claim credit for something they had long looked down upon -- the importance of natural law. Can anyone say "all things to all people"?

Quote:
Ed:
Hardly, belief in the biblical understanding of miracles does not equate to a chaotic and irrational world.
Except that the Bible nowhere gives a coherent theory of the occurrence of miracles.

Quote:
lp: But why did it take so long to happen? Why wasn't the New Testament filled with experiments and induction? Why didn't the Church Fathers carry on an active scientific-research program?
Ed:
Because early on their primary duty was the growth of the church. ...
Except that improving science would have made possible improved technology -- and improved military and economic prowess.

Quote:
Ed:
And Galileo's claim is the same as mine and most evangelical Christians today, ie the bible is not a science text.

lp: So the early chapters of Genesis are NOT literal history?
Ed:
No, they are literal history but some of the terms are not as specific as a science text.
One can prove anything one wants to by redefining words. For example, one could "prove" that the Bible demonstrates evolution with the help of appropriate word definitions.
lpetrich is offline  
Old 11-18-2002, 08:40 PM   #598
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Coast. Australia.
Posts: 5,455
Exclamation

Lpetrich, how do you always get your response to ed in so quickly? Do you check back every 15 minutes to see if the kracken has resurfaced?
Doubting Didymus is offline  
Old 11-18-2002, 09:57 PM   #599
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Lebanon, OR, USA
Posts: 16,829
Post

I think you mean the <a href="http://unmuseum.mus.pa.us/kraken.htm" target="_blank">kraken</a>. Which was clearly an exaggerated giant squid.

Cute idea -- His Eddianness as a monster from the deep...

But I'm a frequent visitor to E/C, which may be why I manage to answer His Eddianness so quickly.

[ November 18, 2002: Message edited by: lpetrich ]</p>
lpetrich is offline  
Old 11-19-2002, 02:29 PM   #600
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Coast. Australia.
Posts: 5,455
Post

That's the feller.

Actually, I was referring to the whole thread, this massive, bloated, limestone encrusted beast that keeps bubbling to the surface. It remids me of the poem, which may or may not have been Tennyson?

Below the thunders of the upper deep
Far, far beneath in the abysmal sea
His ancient, dreamless, uninvaded sleep
The Kraken sleepeth: faintest sunlights flee
About his shadowy sides; above him swell
Huge sponges of millennial growth and height
And far away into the sickly light
From many a wondrous and secret cell
Unnumber'd and enormous polypi
Winnow with giant arms the lumbering green.
There hath he lain for ages, and will lie
Battening upon huge sea-worms in his sleep
Until the latter fire shall heat the deep
Then once by man and angels to be seen
In roaring he shall rise and on the surface die.


I have an extremely odd memory. I can remember this poem by heart from secondary english (maybe seven years ago?), but I have never managed to memorise my multiplication tables.
Doubting Didymus is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:58 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.