Skip to comments.
The creation of Creationism
Timesonline ^
| July 23, 2008
| John Habgood
Posted on 07/23/2008 4:11:44 PM PDT by Soliton
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-39 last
To: Maxpowers
I would be willing to hypothesize that most evolution do not seek answers of science but seek to disprove God.Hypothesize then read Darwin and use him as your first test case.
21
posted on
07/23/2008 6:05:43 PM PDT
by
Soliton
(Investigate, study, learn, then express an opinion)
To: dan1123
Funny, the scientific method cannot be the basis for epistemology. Do you even understand the concept? Maybe not philosophically, but then all philosophy is simply opinion. It can be empirically. Scientific method produces results, it has utility, it works.
22
posted on
07/23/2008 6:08:43 PM PDT
by
Soliton
(Investigate, study, learn, then express an opinion)
To: dan1123
Someone needs to read the Ayn Rand thread.Rand was NUTS
23
posted on
07/23/2008 6:09:41 PM PDT
by
Soliton
(Investigate, study, learn, then express an opinion)
To: Tucker39
It wasn't a many paths to God folderal as you say - there is a theme throughout all mankind of a supreme being - I'm not talking idols or anything like that - there are people on Pacific Islands who've never heard of the Hebrew/Christian God yet they believe in some sort of Super Spirit or Being that created all living things ....
24
posted on
07/23/2008 6:10:29 PM PDT
by
SkyDancer
("What Our Enemies Couldn't Do Our Politicians Will")
To: Soliton
Let the solipsisms begin!How will you know if they are real?
Depends on who you ask...
Cheers!
25
posted on
07/23/2008 6:24:24 PM PDT
by
grey_whiskers
(The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: Soliton
I believe it. But then again, have I not drunk of the soma? Leave Huxley out of this!
26
posted on
07/23/2008 6:25:53 PM PDT
by
grey_whiskers
(The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: grey_whiskers
Great allusion pick up except in this case I was responding to his posting a Vedic creation story.
“Soma - Vedas. In the Vedas, or Vedic scriptures, Soma is portrayed as sacred and as a god (deva). The god is the plant and the drink; there is no difference. The plant is the god and the drink is the god and the plant is the drink they are all three the same. Soma is similar to Greek ambrosia (cognate to amrita); it is what the gods drink, and what made them deities. Indra and Agni are known for drinking massive amounts of Soma. Mortals also drink it, giving access to the divine.”
This is what I was alluding to and where Huxley probably got the idea.
Cheers!
27
posted on
07/23/2008 6:34:44 PM PDT
by
Soliton
(Investigate, study, learn, then express an opinion)
To: Soliton
Yah, I know.
But since there was an atheist stream in the Huxley line, and you were indirectly inveighing against something typically associated with Christianity, I thought I'd throw in the reference.
I tend towards bad puns and wordplay.
Cheers!
28
posted on
07/23/2008 6:46:17 PM PDT
by
grey_whiskers
(The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: grey_whiskers
I tend towards bad puns and wordplay.A pun spelled backward is a "nup" and anup is anup!
29
posted on
07/23/2008 6:58:11 PM PDT
by
Soliton
(Investigate, study, learn, then express an opinion)
To: Maxpowers
I would be willing to hypothesize that most evolution do not seek answers of science but seek to disprove God. Nonsense. I would be willing to hypothesize that most scientists just want to figure out how things work.
30
posted on
07/23/2008 6:59:40 PM PDT
by
Coyoteman
(Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
To: Soliton
Soma - Vedas. In the Vedas, or Vedic scriptures, Soma is portrayed as sacred and as a god (deva). The god is the plant and the drink; there is no difference. The plant is the god and the drink is the god and the plant is the drink they are all three the same. Soma is similar to Greek ambrosia (cognate to amrita); it is what the gods drink, and what made them deities. Indra and Agni are known for drinking massive amounts of Soma. Mortals also drink it, giving access to the divine. R. Gordon Wasson made a good case for the Amanita muscaria mushroom being Soma.
31
posted on
07/23/2008 7:02:33 PM PDT
by
Coyoteman
(Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
To: Coyoteman
Amanita muscaria I lived in Scotland and they grew in my yard. Pretty, but dangerous.
32
posted on
07/23/2008 7:06:05 PM PDT
by
Soliton
(Investigate, study, learn, then express an opinion)
To: Soliton
Philosophy is just rationalized religion at worst, or at best, rationalism without evidence. I have accepted scientific method as the foundation of my epistimology, sorry!
______
I would have thought that some readings on the philosophy of science would be of some interest to you. Some fascinating articles I read in my undergrad days, specifically dealing with physical manifestations of ‘mental’ events.
33
posted on
07/24/2008 7:18:48 AM PDT
by
dmz
To: Maxpowers
One can ask a question to seek answers or one can ask a question because they already think they have an answer or to achieve a desired answer, thus not really asking a question. So is the questions of God and evolution are probably
1. if things evolve God did not create
2. Since God did not create things evolve
What does it mean when people start stating conclusions and submitting that they are the questions?
34
posted on
07/24/2008 7:25:40 AM PDT
by
tacticalogic
("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
To: dmz
I have dozens of books on the subject.
35
posted on
07/24/2008 7:59:01 AM PDT
by
Soliton
(Investigate, study, learn, then express an opinion)
To: dmz
I would have thought that some readings on the philosophy of science would be of some interest to you.It was at one point, but I grew tired of it. There was philosophical discussions for two thousand years as to whether matter is atomic in nature or not. There were great minds on both sides. It took Boyle and a J shaped piece of glass to provide the first evidence. Philosophical arguments are stillborn hypotheses. Science is the answer to advancing our knowledge of the universe.
36
posted on
07/24/2008 8:14:32 AM PDT
by
Soliton
(Investigate, study, learn, then express an opinion)
To: Soliton
Can’t argue that the philosophy of science can get a bit tedious after a while ... and won’t argue that science is going to lead us to knowledge of our universe. I would disagree insofar as you suggest that philosophical pursuits cannot advance human knowledge (there being to knowledge than just knowledge of our universe). A very small point in the overall scheme of things.
37
posted on
07/24/2008 8:34:12 AM PDT
by
dmz
To: Maxpowers
I would be willing to hypothesize that (many of Soliton’s threads) do not seek answers of science but seek to disprove God.
I just ‘evolved’ your comments slightly....
38
posted on
07/24/2008 8:34:27 AM PDT
by
scottdeus12
(Jesus is real, whether you believe in Him or not.)
Comment #39 Removed by Moderator
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-39 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson