Re: Here's my problem with you people
- From: "Dana Tweedy" <reddfrogg@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2005 01:36:03 GMT
"Phil Osopher" <phil@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:2t6ne19rtnei77gmmmi6q189eks3i8npb6@xxxxxxxxxx
> On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 23:57:30 GMT, "Dana Tweedy" <reddfrogg@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Logos" <ffdd@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>news:JJCdnR4RWaR9vXnfRVn-og@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Darwinism takes all the wonder out of the world.
>>
>>Maybe for you. I think the process of evolution adds to the wonder in the
>>world.
>>
>>> It reduces Man into nothing more than a machine, or even worse, a
>>> byproduct of some biological process.
>>
>>What's wrong with being a machine, or a byproduct of a biologial process?
>>Some of the most wonderful things in the world are the product of a
>>biologial process.
>
> Only because all biological processes are initiated and controlled by
> a higher intelligence, by some called God.
I have no problem with the idea that God is behind the biological processes
of life. That still doesn't answer the question. What's wrong with being
a machine, or a biproduct of a biological process?
>
> If randomness and accidents only governed this universe, it would be a
> madhouse - if there would be any conscious beings to experience it at
> all.
Which is why science does not attribute randomness and accidents with
governing the universe. Randomness is only a part of the process, not the
whole thing.
>
>
>>> Man no longer has a purpose. He is an accident.
>>
>>Humans have the purpose they choose to have for themselves.
>
> And yet all feelings of purpose have a common denominator: an
> underlying feeling of joy.
Really? How do you determine this?
> You cannot feel purpose without feeling joy
> also.
Why not?
>And that's not an accident, for the only purpose of life itself
> is joy.
On what do you base this assertion?
> It was created for that, joy is the only logical reason for
> creating or chooosing anything, and the strive for feeling better than
> you do is the only reason behind any activity.
While I don't necessarily disagree, what makes you think this claim is any
way objective?
>
> Blaming God for all the suffering in the world is also an expression
> of this inborn feeling that joy is what life's meant to be about. It's
> the logical choice.
I don't blame God for all suffering. People often bring suffering on
themselves. Sometimes people suffer for no apparent reason. Blaming God
for that is pointless.
>
>
>>>
>>> I just refuse to believe that.
>>
>>Then don't believe that life is purposeless. No one says you have to.
>>Adjust your thinking, because the fact of evolution isn't going away.
>
> Evolution is just a certain interpretation of natural processes. And a
> rather distorted one in its current form.
What do you feel is 'distorted' about the current form of evolutionary
theory?
DJT
>
>
.
- References:
- Re: Here's my problem with you people
- From: Phil Osopher
- Re: Here's my problem with you people
- Prev by Date: Re: Milan demonstrates how zealously atheists hold the unscientific doctrine of Naturalism
- Next by Date: Re: Ed Conrad's new home(s)
- Previous by thread: Re: Here's my problem with you people
- Next by thread: Re: Here's my problem with you people
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
