Welcome to the ToeQuest.
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 42 of 42
  1. #41
    Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    5,807
    Blog Entries
    62
    Thanks Given
    3,838
    Thanked 3,462x in 2,168 Posts
    Rep Power
    89

    Re: One TOE or many?

    Quote Originally Posted by Benedict Broere
    You're a true believer Lloyd, but science doesn't back up your atheism - on the contrary I would say. Just ask any scientist, at least any science-philosopher. But you will ofcourse ignore this, as you ignore my suggestion atheism, as any worldview, is a psychological and cultural determined opinion on the world in general.
    I didn't say it wasn't, Benedict___all positions are intellectual constructs of mind___I simply stated the two must remain separate, in order for science to truly be science. This is a scientific fact___whether the scientist/philosopher is a-theist or not... My post stands as correct___or prove differently, by explaining how inanimate matter creates animate being___or even how your worldview has animate being creating inanimate matter...

    regards
    "To develop the skill of correct thinking is in the first place to learn what you have to disregard. In order to go on, you have to know what to leave out; this is the essence of effective thinking." Kurt Godel
    "Time and space are modes in which we think and not conditions in which we live." Albert Einstein
    "The uncertainty principle is an absolute, finite, universal constant." L.G.
    "The tick-tick-tick of the caesium atom is a sliding-time-scaler constant of all finite universal motion." L.G.

  2. #42
    1st degree Black Belt
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    247
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 18x in 14 Posts
    Rep Power
    25

    Re: One TOE or many?

    Now you're talking Lloyd.

    But I see three projects here.

    A : 'all positions are intellectual constructs of mind'

    This can be investigated.

    B: 'how inanimate matter creates animate being'

    'creates'? We don't know.

    C: 'or even how (...) animate being creates inanimate matter...'

    Even a larger mystery.

    For me I think science needs to be flexible in worldview or leave all options open, for than trying to make out what is most fruithfull in understanding what is going on, as world, researchable world. While the remaing for the time being unresearchable stays open for discussion - and is intensely discussed these days.

    For me the option of something fundamentally creative is attractive for all kinds of reasons. But I know the opposite - this world is by itself - can also be true. Science hasn't evolved that far yet that the one or the other becomes more plausible or true.

 

 
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Back to top