Posted on 03/12/2009 7:41:17 PM PDT by Gordon Greene
Alas, poor Richard. Ever since being thrashed by Ben Stein in Expelled he's just gotten more and more nonsensical. Then, it was that there is no intelligent design of life, except of course maybe alien-directed intelligent design. Now, it seems he has decided to follow some recent sage advice and avoid using the “d” word. And, he’s scrapped his previous idea of using designoid as a replacement.
Then Dawkins got to the essential framework of the rest of his talk, making a distinction within purpose between the purpose that comes about as adaptation via natural selection, which he called “archi-purpose”, and the purpose that comes about through the intent of a planning brain, which he called “neo-purpose”. Archi-purpose, then, resembles an intentional purpose, but is not such: the resemblance is an illusion. Neo-purpose, as Dawkins views it, is itself an evolved adaptation. Now it looks like he’ll just go with purpose instead. You can have unintentional design, or instinctual design, or whatever you want to call it — spider’s webs, snowflakes, etc. But you can’t have unintentional intention, or unpurposeful purpose. It seems that purpose is less of an illusion even than design is.
So, what do Lewis Carroll and Richard Dawkins have in common? They both taught at Oxford and they both spouted nonsense (but only in one case intentionally).
"You are old, Father Williams," the young man said, "And your hair has become very white; and yet you incessantly stand on your head. Do you think, at your age it is right?"
"In my youth," Father Williams replied to his son, "I feared it might injure the brain; But, now that I'm perfectly sure I have none, Why, I do it again and again." (Lewis Carroll)
There are mixes within the 2 points of view that hardliners for both sides don't like. I am certainly believe in creation but it doesn't necessarily have to be a young earth for me.
A lot of Liberal scientists seem to have a problem with Christianity in the first place and use science to condemn creationists as unthinking morons and they have leftie followers who use their rants to deride and attack Christian's not just on Scientific grounds but on moral and ethical grounds also (like they are the ones taking the higher road). My main point was that now you will know how some Christians feel.
Cheers
Mel
I agree, but I don't think the answer to deplorable tactics is to adopt them ourselves.
I don’t but I am not going to apologise for those who do! I can understand how those who have suffered at others hands may want to have a dig. Not nice really and certainly not in the Christian spirit of things!
Anyway it’s nice to be agreeing on some things. Polite discourse can help us all at least understand why each side places such weight on what they believe to be true and that may help for better discussion in the future at least from those whose agenda is not so urgent!
Cheers
Mel
“So maybe some atheist can explain, believe what you will, but why the anger and logical contortions?”
You offend me with logic... I’ve been asking them this question in different ways for a few days and have yet to receive a direct answer on anything from any of them.
Seriously, I appreciate the time you took here. What you did to is make me rethink what it is I’m fighting here. I stress over the fact someone would post their stupidity just to take faith to task but that’s probably a waste of time and energy. There are too many things worth fighting for and too many constructive ways to fight for them.
You, my friend have offered common sense on a stick. That is something no one will receive from arguments with the anti-religionists.
Thank you.
GG
“I don’t believe I’ve ever heard anyone express those beliefs.”
I haven’t either... I’ll have to think that one through but right offhand I don’t get it.
Let’s see if we can find some points to agree on... please read this if you get a chance and let me know what you think (and yes, I am inviting brutal honesty with no recourse).
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2205633/posts
We are free citizens of a self-governing, Constitutional republic. It is our civic duty to involve ourselves in that process - that is what we owe Ceasar.
I have no doubt. And I’m happy to discuss what we disagree on. I honestly love the debate...
I’ll always answer questions honestly if the questions not just purely antagonistic. I can’t learn a blamed thing cooped up in my own mind all the time; Of that I’m sure.
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.