questor Posted May 30, 2006 Author Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 Ugh, i have said to you that i have no further interest in discoursing with you, but your comments are sometimes so out of the box, it leads me towonder about your thought process. you somehow think that Erasmus, Pyroor others have demolished the basis for my interpretation of perceived evidence for ID. all they have done is present their reasons for believing theopposite of me, when none of us have any proof. it's all just opinion, i interpret evidence for, they interpret the same evidence against, you seem to have no thoughts of your own except what others have said. this comment of yours i find astounding:''You appear to have an obsession with the fact that you believe, almost as if you're in love with the experience of belief. I find it fascinating, particularly as intelligent design is so unimportant, whether the idea is correct or not makes no difference in the world.'' does your mind tell you that it makes no difference whether the universejust happened or whether it was the result of ID? you say it makes no difference? do you have any idea of the importance to science, humanity and all it's endeavors if the truth were known? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ughaibu Posted May 30, 2006 Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 Questor: As far as I can see, you haven't answered my (and your own) question as to why you "believe" what you yourself have described as a "possibility" and an "opinion". I take it that you are employing a conventional usage of the word "believe", ie accept as true or real. You do not believe that every possibility is true, do you? Neither do you believe all your opinions to be true, do you?Do your concluding questions indicate that you think the question is of such importance that a person must necessarilly hold some species of belief concerning it's possible answers? I have no belief concerning the origin of the universe, such a stance is possible and reasonable. For the record, my answer to your final question is "no", I cant see what difference it makes whether the universe is the product of intelligent design or not, please enlighten me. As to the arguments that you've received from various posters, including myself, these do not show "reasons for believing the opposite" to you, they point up logical flaws in your idea. As far as I recall, none of those mentioned has expressed a belief about the origin of the universe, and certainly, this is not a polarised matter resolving into intelligent design or it's "opposite". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southtown Posted May 30, 2006 Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 double post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southtown Posted May 30, 2006 Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 Why do YOU believe in a deity?Started as an inability to believe in meaninglessness or randomness. Soon turned into a feeling of disappointment in the lack of acknowledgement by the establishment of anything beyond the physical. Matured into a connection with concepts such as purpose, curiosity, unity surpassing connections with concepts such as math and mass. Sickened by the realization that I don't stop. Strengthened by struggle to live with myself. Set free by the epiphany that the physical is immaterial. I am wonder. Keep the boundary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questor Posted June 1, 2006 Author Report Share Posted June 1, 2006 South, good reply. you are one of the few who could/would express yourself with an answer to this question. it could be that the physical is the bottom line. this may take millennia to prove. currently the scientific ''establishment''is in that camp. if it comes to pass that eveything can be explained in a natural or physical way, then that truth must be accepted. meanwhile there are too many phenomenae which cannot be explained by our mathematical models, theories, and scientific examination. the prevailing belief on this site seems to be that gravity occurred by accident, strong and weak forces just happened to occur, consciousness,thought and life, happy coincidences of biochemistry, and the grand order and performance of the universe occurred strictly by chance. this seems a large leap of faith by people who are supposed to examine events down to the bottom layer. i think the minds that burrow most deeply seem to embrace some type of intelligent creation (Einstein, Planck). the stuggle those present cannot come to grips with is separating the possibility the universe could have been created and is maintained by an intelligent presence, amid the constant bickering about their idea of God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southtown Posted June 1, 2006 Report Share Posted June 1, 2006 the prevailing belief on this site seems to be that gravity occurred by accident, strong and weak forces just happened to occur, consciousness,thought and life, happy coincidences of biochemistry, and the grand order and performance of the universe occurred strictly by chance.Yes well, the 'peer-reviewers' have spoken. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.