|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
| Author | Topic: flying spaghetti monster flap in kansas | |||||||||||||||||||
|
GDR Member  Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
EZScience writes: you have apparently reached a 'personal equilibrium' w/r/t the design issue vs. science. It occurred to me as an after-thought that I just wanted to point out that I don't agree that a "design issue vs. science" problem exists. I just see science as the study of that which is designed. Everybody is entitled to my opinion. 
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
parasomnium writes: The problem is that, in principle I can never definitely prove the non-existence of anything. Logic doesn't allow it. On the other hand, again in principle, you might be able to prove the existence of the metaphysical. Science perhaps precludes it, but logic does not. If it exists, logic permits its provability. But we have no way of testing by empirical means the metaphysical. As to whether it exists or not we are logically back to a philosphical/theological question. If you have no way of scientifically testing the metaphysical then either conclusion is logical.
parasomnium writes: Silly? How? Could you please explain that? Your suggestion that a pink unicorn as a creator is as logical as the idea that there is intelligence behind the universe is silly. I've gotta run Everybody is entitled to my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
EZScience writes: So do I. I just view evolution as the designer
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024
