On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 09:22:43 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Mike Halmarack wrote:


Take for instance the TV that you gave as an example previously.
You claim to be a card carrying physicist but if I asked you to
explain in scientific detail how a television worked, then you'd be
left in a difficult position.

I wouldn't. I can tell you in detail *how* every single part of it works
up to an including the quantum theory inherent in the semicobductors.

That's my point and also why I would remain unconvinced by your
explanation.

I can't of course tell you *why* it works..why the world happens to be
the way it happens to be, though.

Excuse me for not previously making it clear that I also meant *why*.


But 'why' is such a HUMAN word.

Yes, I'll go along with that.

It
already implies design, and purpose..the moment we ASK the question WHY
is the world the way it is, we already IMPLY the existence of a God like
being with Manlike purpose who made it that way...there is indeed the
trap of false logic that leads to God.

Asking why means that I believe in a false god. Nice one! :-)


The world is the way it is because it has to be some way or it wouldn't
be a world, and presumably its the way it is because if it wasn't, it
wouldn't be.

Verging on de Selby-esqe but OK.

If being dismissive and waving your scientist badge didn't work and
you had to come up with the goods you'd resort to quoting from
publications and documents that you don't fully understand.

I have made it a point to try and fully understand everything I have
ever come across that is relevant to what I need to do. Especially
religion and philosophy and science.

So have religious fanatics.


Nothing in science precludes the idea of *A* god, but an awful lot of it
definitely counter-indicates the existence of *THE CHRISTIAN GOD*.

Particularly the one that the literal Christians believe in, who made
the world 5000 years ago in 7 days.

So of all the gods that don't exist, that one doesn't exist most?

Documents
that will leave a lot of questions unanswered because human knowledge
doesn't extend far enough to fill in the blanks. You will accept the
validity of the contents of the documents as a matter of faith because
you are a scientist.

No, *I* won't. Fortuntately, unlike Religion of the Deocentric sort,
Science has a philosophy behind it which is actively pursued and
developed by people whose main purpose is to prevent science from
becoming an act of blind faith. Now faith in the existence of the world
as a valid concept is of course necessary for the pursuit of science,
and faith in the evidence of ones own experience also. In fact Science
is merely the logical examination of that experience insofar as it is
agreed upon by enough people to become reliable. That is all. Science
merely notes at the philosophical level that there is no *need* to
introduce an *anthropic* Power into the philosophical mix, in order to
explain our experience of the world.
And it does not rely on bad logic, or emotional arguments either.

My argument isn't against science, because I have neither the time
inclination or ability to develop, sustain and conclude such an
argument. My argument is against people who use science as a religion
to protect and advance their own interests.


How does that make you different from some
adherent to a faith based religion?

If it were true, it would not. However it is patently not true.

I hold that it's true, based on rational observation and you haven't
convinced me otherwise.

It is a complete mistake that nearly all Christians make, about science.

Lacking intellectual capacity, they find it inconceivable - literally -
that anyone can see the world through the cold and crystal clear eyes of
logic. They cannot accept that there is no Daddy, that nothing matters a
twopenny **** in any cosmological sense, and that whether they live or
die, sinner or saint, is of absolutely no concern to anyone who is not
directly or indirectly affected by their actions.

Its called emotional immaturity..

You're just a full of **** defective human being like the rest of us.
Come out from behind that badge.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that other people are just like you,
or even remotely like you. You have NO idea how far down other roads it
is possible for a man to go.

So you can make assumptive claims about what is and is not, based upon
your experience and interpretation of reality but caution me against
doing so myself. That makes scientists like yourself a special case,
which is the central problem that I was attempting to draw attention
to.
--
Regards,
Mike Halmarack

Drop the (EGG) to email me.