Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,816 Year: 3,073/9,624 Month: 918/1,588 Week: 101/223 Day: 12/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   My Understanding (hypothetically)
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 69 (187195)
02-21-2005 10:50 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by contracycle
02-21-2005 8:57 AM


the glaring hypocrisy of contracycle
contracycle writes:
quote:
How about "because cluttering up the forum with with unintelligible gibberish is itself bad form"?
And this hurts you how? And justifies ad hominem attacks against Brad how?
I always knew you were a fraud. No one can crack the slightest joke about any minority group at any time without you labelling them a hate monger, but you see it as okay to make vicious attacks against an individual with communications difficulties?
What a piece of work you are, contracycle.
EDITED to change subtitle.
This message has been edited by berberry, 02-21-2005 09:53 AM

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by contracycle, posted 02-21-2005 8:57 AM contracycle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by contracycle, posted 02-22-2005 5:51 AM berberry has replied

  
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 37 of 69 (187382)
02-21-2005 10:51 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Snikwad
02-21-2005 5:39 PM


A shout-out for the Snik!
I notice that no one - other than Brad of course - has yet thanked you for this, Snikwad. You've been able to make sense of what has had the rest of us baffled. Now that you explain it and Brad agrees that you at least have the gist of his meaning, it's like that proverbial light has finally been flicked ON.
Some of us do understand Brad quite well when he talks about things that don't directly relate to his scientific / creationist ideas. Most of us like Brad and we want to understand him better. You've helped us greatly and I can't thank you enough.
Brad seems to be ecstatic about it; I feel terrific for him. For my part I'm just glad to see that he finally got through to someone, and I hope you'll stick around and continue this dialogue with him. I'll be following along, I promise.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Snikwad, posted 02-21-2005 5:39 PM Snikwad has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Brad McFall, posted 02-24-2005 5:43 PM berberry has replied

  
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 44 of 69 (187480)
02-22-2005 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by contracycle
02-22-2005 5:51 AM


Re: the glaring hypocrisy of contracycle
contracycle lies:
quote:
It hurst me...
No it doesn't. It hurts you in no way whatsoever. Stop lying. What you see as "noise" others enjoy reading. Get over it.
quote:
Furthermore, your "logic" here is simply absurd - racism is not about "minorities", but about groups...
Who said anything about racism for crying out loud? I said that you try to paint anyone who tells a joke as an intolerant hate-monger, yet you defend someone for making unprovoked personal attacks against a member of this forum. You're a hypocrite and a fraud.
quote:
...my concerns are not based on "nice"ness.
Do tell.
quote:
What we see here rather is the sublime arrogance of berberry, who quite clearly has never bothered to engage with anything I had to say on the topic of hate-speech at all.
No, I didn't engage your nonsense about hate-speech. I read it, though. It was worthless drivel.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by contracycle, posted 02-22-2005 5:51 AM contracycle has not replied

  
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 69 (187484)
02-22-2005 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by Brad McFall
02-22-2005 8:31 AM


Brad, contracycle was defending SLPx's attack against you upthread. That was hypocritical of contracycle because in an earlier thread he took issue with innocuous jokes, calling them hate-speech. I was angry that he would defend SLPx's attack and I called him on it. I'm sorry it's off-topic, but the original offense took place in this thread so this is the thread where I responded.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Brad McFall, posted 02-22-2005 8:31 AM Brad McFall has not replied

  
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 54 of 69 (188350)
02-25-2005 3:26 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Brad McFall
02-24-2005 5:43 PM


Brad writes me:
quote:
BUT THE POINT ABOUT EVC IS NOT about whether I’m a genius, a working scientist, not a naive graduated student
I guess not, but I can't help speculating from time to time about you being a genius. Your knowledge of scientists and philosophers - not to mention science and philosophy - goes far beyond mine. I can follow some of what you say about Kant because I became interested in him at college and read parts of his Critique of Pure Reason. (BTW, for anyone who might not know, Kant is often considered to be one of the most important German philosophers of all time. If you aren't familiar with him, check the entry at Wikipedia. His writing, if I recall, was often cryptic in ways similar to Brad's writing). I've read up on him lately to refresh my memory, and I notice that his views seem to heavily influence yours. Am I correct in believing that you see 'intelligent design' as a type of a priori knowledge?
I think it's important not to try to carry Kant's science notions too far in today's debate, because his ideas were formulated at a time when modern science was in its infancy.
quote:
I don’t see how my cultural actions warrant the response I received from professionals and in post after post you have noticed this. Thanks
You're welcome.
quote:
I empathize with creationists of any religion because of this hostility or persecution that I witnessed and now and again only blip on the screen every now and then .
I can understand your empathy for creationists, but I think this points out a cultural difference between us. Where you live, creationists are a minority, no? That's not at all the case in Mississippi. Creationists here are an almost overwhelming majority. So while I can understand your empathy and even your philosophic agreement with them on some of the ideas behind ID, I cannot understand why you feel that ID is science.
quote:
A jar with a dead frog in it was enough for my lover so a well intentioned post should work just as well as happiness lost.
You do crack me up sometimes, Brad. That's marvelous!
quote:
I was always wondering if one day I might be at the cultural equivalent of Einstein’s patent office. It seems at least THAT time has arrived.
Another interesting choice of words. I think I see your point.
quote:
The crucial thing here is to facilitate prediction from a family of proteins to other molecular correlations. Should such exist, there is no stopping actual research on the relation of subatomic forces and heritability. My approach if it works will out compete the current methods. That said it is true we need to see working examples but I posted this because I see no a priori reason to discount categorically thoughts that might relate ordered atomic states and heritability. It seems pretty easy to contemplate that existence.
Easy to contemplate maybe, but are you talking about using "thoughts" to justify ID as science? I don't think you can do that until you find those working examples you spoke of.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Brad McFall, posted 02-24-2005 5:43 PM Brad McFall has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Brad McFall, posted 02-25-2005 6:57 AM berberry has replied

  
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 69 (188351)
02-25-2005 3:33 AM


And by the way, Brad, I remember somewhere upthread you complained about the thumbs-down icon next to the thread listing. You can change that yourself by editing the OP.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

  
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 59 of 69 (188508)
02-25-2005 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Brad McFall
02-25-2005 6:57 AM


Brad writes me:
quote:
You have read something into my recent post as I can not say ID is science until I do the science.
Well I'm glad to hear you say that. But in another thread we were discussing the stickers that some states are mandating on science textbooks promoting ID. You seem to feel that the stickers are appropriate while I don't. Just as Kant was a philosopher, so ID is philosophy until someone can find a scientific basis for it. That's why I say that ID has no place in science classrooms.
quote:
By writing my understading in Fourier's words I could show you something else about ID but I think if you are putting as much attention to Kant as it is begining to appear to me you understand why as well as how I am reading him in EVCspeak.
Well, I think I'm beginning to understand how you see all these scientific and philosophic disciplines as interrelated and perhaps even interdependent. I suppose I could sum up my complaint by saying that, in my view, philosophy can draw on science for its conclusions but science cannot draw on philosophy for anything more than inspiration.
In other words, if we allow ID into science classrooms, aren't we undermining science?

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Brad McFall, posted 02-25-2005 6:57 AM Brad McFall has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Brad McFall, posted 02-25-2005 1:34 PM berberry has replied

  
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 61 of 69 (188517)
02-25-2005 2:10 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Brad McFall
02-25-2005 1:34 PM


Brad writes me:
quote:
The problem comes if one thinks there are NONE.
Absolutely. Just as has been pointed out by other posters here, even the theory of gravity has problems associated with it; problems that some say are even more serious than the problems that exist in evolution theory. Science textbooks should certainly reflect the fact that there are always problems in science; when we get to the point that there are no more problems then we will no longer need science. But to my mind introducing philosophy into science classrooms is not the correct way to show students that science isn't perfect.
quote:
Yes the stickers are bad but it is worse to be committed involuntarily if a few stickers or note about errors could have prevented it.
Are you talking about your own history? How could these stickers have had any effect on that?

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Brad McFall, posted 02-25-2005 1:34 PM Brad McFall has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Brad McFall, posted 02-25-2005 2:33 PM berberry has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024