The problem with EVC

The question is whether the two can be distinguished. If they can't, it's a mere trival name change. If they can be distinguuished in the sense that FSM is not the creator, then FSM is an extraneous entity.

A being, FSM, is being analogized in satirical fashion with another being, God.If FSM is the Designer (the creator), then he's just another name for God.If FSM is not the Creator, then what does FSM do?When I asked this of Crashfrog, he said "Where do you think all those spaghetti and meatballs come from?"Is that the same type of question as, "Where did the universe come from?"In order for the analogy to work, there has to be the same degree of uncertainty in regard to speghetti and meatballs, if that's what FSM does, as there is in regard to the origin of the universe.If FSM is a being that arose from nature, rather than the creator, then he is logically extraneous. There's no reason for anyone to believe in him.God, however, might be the creator of the universe, so he might not be extraneous. Edited by robinrohan, : No reason given.

Well, I certainly agree with science. I don't discuss science except maybe to ask questions. I discuss philosophy.However, if somebody says that such and such is a FACT, I might like to know what he means by that and how he knows it. I'm not convinced my ideas are "addlepated." Well, the word has a couple of meanings: (1)confused and (2)eccentric. Eccentric maybe. I don't think they are confused. But I don't have any problem with people disagreeing with me. It was their manner of doing so that I objected to.Edited by robinrohan, : No reason given.

---

Statement of basic position: I am a nihilist, which means, in my sense of the word, that life has no objective purpose. This entails a lack of belief in God. My beliefs are tentative.

Thanks. This thread has been therapeutic.

It's mentioned in the OP.(admittedly, the OP was vaguely stated).

Yeah, I probably shouldn't use that word "logic" anymoe. Maybe I could say, "It seems reasonable to me . . ."

I do try to spell out why something seems reasonable to me.

The problem I was noting in the OP was not receiving replies.

Some have been rather vague about this hardness and intricacy. Some just note that I don't understand logic and the like.

Like I implied before, it was the tone of the responses that I objected to rather than the fact that there was a lack of communication. The lack of communication may have been due to my speaking too briefly on the subject.

If you are making reference to the questions I was asking on the thread entitled "Evolution Simplified," my goal was to try to figure out if there was something ineluctable about the facts presented in the OP--if, given the nature of the evolutionary process, these facts could be deduced rather than just observed. I mentioned that several times. The OP was written in an emotional state of anger, so initially I just wanted to express my anger. There's nothing wrong with EVC per se.I think there's something inappropriate about a poster's comment that I can't use the common meaning of the word "logic" because he and certain others prefer a specialized meaning. I think that's an example of snobbery. His meaning of the word is the only one that counts; his group is the only group that can think about something logically. The rest of us just have to say that something might be "reasonable." So according to him, I should be banned from using the word "logic" in the common sense, in which it is a synonym for "reason." Perhaps he thinks that I should be banned from expressing myself about these ultimate questions at all. After all, what do I know? Have I a degree in formal logic? Obviously not.ABE: Every man need not be a scientist, but everyone in some sense is their own philosopher.edited for typosEdited by robinrohan, : No reason given.Edited by robinrohan, : No reason given.Edited by robinrohan, : No reason given.

I don't know that I want to start parading examples, but the phrase "world-class university" is a direct quote from one boaster.

The contemptuous chuckling among the in-crowd.

Yeah, I'm having fun too now.I wonder what "research" they are talking about.

Would the research be to test the hypothesis that God is "outside our timeline"?