Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: betty boop; cornelis; hosepipe; js1138; Right Wing Professor
Thank you oh so very much for your excellent essay-post!

But maybe we could try this. It has been alleged (in the article at the top) that on the materialist/physicalist/naturalist view, there isn't a dime's worth of difference between a Karl Marx and a Mother Theresa. And indeed, in terms of this theory (or doctrine -- maybe dogma would be an even better word), there is no difference: Both K. Marx and Mother Theresa are alike in being astronomically complex bundles of very smart chemicals.

I see your remarks have met with the predictable disdain - which indicates to me the correspondents reject self-organizing complexity among other things. That is bizarre on the face since self-organizing complexity is a widely accepted model.

In that model the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, new features emerge (such as intelligence in biological life) such that new language is necessary to describe the whole. The same can be said of things made, new language is necessary to describe the thing.

For example, Mother Theresa is greater than the sum of the biochemicals which made up her body much like an automobile is greater than the sum of the parts of which it was made, etc.

Moreover, in the case of Mother Theresa - or the automobile, a particular snowflake or hurricane or whatever - the sum of her "worldline" or consciousness or soul or spirit accrue to her autonomous being as compared to other autonomous biological beings made of the same biochemicals. Likewise a particular car is a unique autonomous entity on its worldline compared to other cars, even of the same make and model, etc.

And yet it is asserted that your point has been "debunked" and you stand accused of "dishonesty". How sad.

Perhaps we should once again research the concepts and models of autonomy, complexity, semiosis, information (successful communication) and intelligence in biological life?

1,077 posted on 12/15/2005 8:56:30 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1065 | View Replies ]


To: Alamo-Girl; betty boop; cornelis
[ Moreover, in the case of Mother Theresa - or the automobile, a particular snowflake or hurricane or whatever - the sum of her "worldline" or consciousness or soul or spirit accrue to her autonomous being as compared to other autonomous biological beings made of the same biochemicals. Likewise a particular car is a unique autonomous entity on its worldline compared to other cars, even of the same make and model, etc. ]

Wow.. you're on a roll girl.. heavy stuff.. Your spirit is quite ugh!.. infinite..

1,080 posted on 12/15/2005 9:17:28 PM PST by hosepipe (CAUTION: This propaganda is laced with hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1077 | View Replies ]

To: Alamo-Girl; js1138
In that model the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, new features emerge (such as intelligence in biological life) such that new language is necessary to describe the whole. The same can be said of things made, new language is necessary to describe the thing.

So you're saying that a human being is not merely a sum of his parts? Now why didn't anyone else think of that?

/sarcasm.

1,085 posted on 12/16/2005 5:11:09 AM PST by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1077 | View Replies ]

To: Alamo-Girl; Right Wing Professor; js1138; marron; hosepipe
Perhaps we should once again research the concepts and models of autonomy, complexity, semiosis, information (successful communication) and intelligence in biological life?

Jeepers A-G, the correspondents who greet us with such predictable disdain apparently did not get much benefit from the last time we did that. We have some really "stiff-necked" people hereabouts who simply refuse to take anything we say seriously. They have shut their ears, and shut their minds. It may be hopeless....

They say that they have answered my objection before -- that a human being must be more than the chemicals out of which he is composed. I'm sure they recognize that man is more than that; but their own doctrine prevents them from giving more than lip-service to the idea. For matter and the non-phenomenal aspects of human reality cannot be integrated in terms of their own model.

So I have not had my "objection" answered by them, ever. Since your "objection" is the same as mine, I tend to doubt you would have any satisfaction from "trying one more time." These folks just don't want to hear it. The spiritual closure is apparently virtually complete, and I gather they like it just fine that way. We'd need a crowbar to pry the spiritual reality that dwells in each man back open again.... FWIW

Sorry to be in such a gloomy mood this morning. But of a truth, there are none so blind as they who will not to see.... A depressing fact, but one that I can live with.... And apparently, sadly, will have to.

What we can do is pray for our correspondents, that by the grace of the Spirit of God they will be drawn into His light in His own time. Thanks so much for writing, Alamo-Girl!

1,091 posted on 12/16/2005 6:54:36 AM PST by betty boop (Dominus illuminatio mea.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1077 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson