Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Materialistic prejudice?
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 4 of 38 (461416)
03-25-2008 11:48 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Jaderis
03-25-2008 3:02 AM


I like the thougtful approach of your OP.
I think the two sides of the evolution debate are often talking at cross purposes.
I think the anti evolutionists in general assume that those who do accept evolution are doing so on the basis of a predefined world view that rejects God, or the literacy of the bible (either consciously or by educational brainwashing) rather than anything else more concrete. I think they reflect their own thinking and the methods by which they have drawn their creationist conclusions on their opponents. Thus talk of evidence and testable conclusions etc. is considered just a smokescreen for the entrenched anti-Christian message that, in the eyes of the creationist, is as equally faith based as their own.
Trying to get across the fact that scientific conclusions have to be materially/empirically testable to be considered even potentially reliable becomes almost impossible to get across in this context. In the absence of appreciating this fact it does just seem like the 'evolutionists' are imposing arbitary and unfair barriers to creationist conclusions. Thus the initial accusation seems strengthened and the positions become even more entrenched.
I shall be interested to see what antievo responses you get to your OP.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Jaderis, posted 03-25-2008 3:02 AM Jaderis has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Jaderis, posted 03-25-2008 12:06 PM Straggler has not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 8 of 38 (461431)
03-25-2008 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by randman
03-25-2008 1:13 PM


Starting Point
I think an interesting approach to testing your ideas in the OP would be to define or how you define what is material and what is spiritual?
As a starting point I would say that a material explanation is one that can be tested empirically.
A spritual or supernatural explanation is one that cannot.
Does that help at all?
It sounds as if you have followed an unusual path to reach your current position!!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by randman, posted 03-25-2008 1:13 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by randman, posted 03-25-2008 1:37 PM Straggler has replied
 Message 10 by randman, posted 03-25-2008 1:38 PM Straggler has not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 11 of 38 (461439)
03-25-2008 1:59 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by randman
03-25-2008 1:37 PM


Re: Starting Point
By your definition, the spiritual thing automatically becomes material once it's testable.
Yes I suppose so. But isn't that how our knowledge has progressed? Natural phenomenon that were once deemed spritual or supernatural now have scientific explanations? (weather, fire, fertility etc. etc.)
I guess it is phenomenon which are claimed to be intrinsically spritual and therefore untestable regardless of technological levels that I was thinking of.
A better definition for this discussion to prove or disprove whether there is evidence for spiritual, material, metaphysical or whatever things is to list the qualities and properties that make up something material, physical, spiritual and metaphysical, and then see if we see anything with those properties and qualities within the universe.
Then I think it would be a good idea if you gave an example of the sort of thing you consider to be spiritual and what it is that makes spiritual rather than material.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by randman, posted 03-25-2008 1:37 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by randman, posted 03-25-2008 3:14 PM Straggler has replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 14 of 38 (461461)
03-25-2008 5:22 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by randman
03-25-2008 3:14 PM


Re: Starting Point
This is all still very broad. Are we talking about Ghosts? Gods? Parallel universes? Are dreams part of the spiritual world? I have had drug induced hallucinations which could quite probably be described as "spiritual" if it were not for the fact that I am such a hopeless cynic.
Invisible covers too many things. Microwaves are invisible but hardly spritual.
What leads us to believe that the spiritual world exists at all outside of our possible desire for it to be so?
How do we train someone to see the spiritual world? How do we know that they are not lying, delusional or even a little bit of both?
I have not considered the claims of those who declare themselves to have spiritual abilities in any detail but my understanding is that they consider themselves immune to testing and thus the validity (or otherwise!!) of their claims is unverifiable by their own terms and definitions?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by randman, posted 03-25-2008 3:14 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by randman, posted 03-25-2008 5:58 PM Straggler has not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 34 of 38 (461588)
03-26-2008 1:02 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by randman
03-26-2008 12:38 PM


Re: Starting Point
We all seem to be a little lost as to what it is exactly that you are proposing should be considered spiritual as opposed to material.
In the absence of any human consciousness at all (or alien or any other physical being that can be said to be conscious) do you agree that the physical material world would continue on obeying the laws of physics regardless? Stars would form, galaxies collide, particles exist etc. etc. etc.
Is your idea of spiritual reality therefore dependent on human (or other) consciousness already being in place for it to exist?
Is consciousness at the the heart of what you would call "spiritual" or have I got completely the wrong end of the stick?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by randman, posted 03-26-2008 12:38 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by randman, posted 03-27-2008 1:01 AM Straggler 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