Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
? information processing capacity. So I take it your signed up to the Gayer Hypothesis by James Lovelock which gives the earth a personality. This fixes the problems which arise from the "blind and undirected chance" premise of evolution/naturalism.
The problem with ID is not Occam's razor. ID is simply unfalsifiable.I'd define ID as the study of complex systems and without taking forward anything unproven. Its not religious per-sey, if it is perceived to lead to that conclusion its merely the result of Occam's razor.
Exactly. I've never seen any version of ID that doesn't ultimately posit a deity as the intelligent designer.
In the same way, all of the many flavours of evolution are Atheism in disguise.
Sure, that is the ultimate position.
In the same way, all of the many flavours of evolution are Atheism in disguise. I have to qualify this by saying there are some who imagine God as the conductor of an orchestra and orchestrates evolution, which of course violates evolution's fundamental principle of fully undirected, randomized change and a filtering mechanism AKA natural selection to filter out the naff ideas.
Respecting each others base camps (and I can fully respect someone even if I disagree), I'd be interested in how you view those who posit a botched TOE that relies on a God to make it work as in, if there wasn't a God, evolution couldn't have happened, so somehow evolution must have proceeded with a "director-in-chief" calling the shots.
As a Christian, I think they lack imagination, are poorly schooled in theology--particularly the metaphysics of causality--and are probably Protestants.Respecting each others base camps (and I can fully respect someone even if I disagree), I'd be interested in how you view those who posit a botched TOE that relies on a God to make it work as in, if there wasn't a God, evolution couldn't have happened, so somehow evolution must have proceeded with a "director-in-chief" calling the shots.
There I can't help you.I know there are, and I have such friends and family elsewhere as well who posit that. What I have never had is the opportunity to discuss this with someone who is an Atheist.
I know there are, and I have such friends and family elsewhere as well who posit that. What I have never had is the opportunity to discuss this with someone who is an Atheist.
Given the (negative) things you just make
up about others' understanding its a bit off for
you to call it respect.
Might be best to ask or otherwise investigate.
The ToE has nothing to do with religion.I know there are, and I have such friends and family elsewhere as well who posit that. What I have never had is the opportunity to discuss this with someone who is an Atheist.
I know there are, and I have such friends and family elsewhere as well who posit that. What I have never had is the opportunity to discuss this with someone who is an Atheist.
Are you replying to me? Because if so, it would be better if you use the quote or reply function in the thread.
But, as I said, it is highly disrespectful to just say that evolution is for atheists, and I also think that it might be against forum rules. I think.
Hi, no this was not asked of anyone specifically, but in any case, I saw that you listed your self as a deist and not as an Atheist. But I would still be interested in your view, not is TOE true, but how does the TOE interact with a God. How does(did) God direct the TOE and is this still the classical evolution theory or is it a 3rd theory of origins.
Here's your atheist, here's your opportunity
What you're talking about is "theistic evolution" and comprises many difference schools of thought. Many of them propose unfalsifiable divine guidance or intervention of some sort. They all accept the scientific findings of evolutionary biology, so it's still the classical theory as far as the science of it goes.Hi, no this was not asked of anyone specifically, but in any case, I saw that you listed your self as a deist and not as an Atheist. But I would still be interested in your view, not is TOE true, but how does the TOE interact with a God. How does(did) God direct the TOE and is this still the classical evolution theory or is it a 3rd theory of origins.
What you're talking about is "theistic evolution" and comprises many difference schools of thought. Many of them propose unfalsifiable divine guidance or intervention of some sort. They all accept the scientific findings of evolutionary biology, so it's still the classical theory as far as the science of it goes.
Sure, that is the ultimate position.
In the same way, all of the many flavours of evolution are Atheism in disguise. I have to qualify this by saying there are some who imagine God as the conductor of an orchestra and orchestrates evolution, which of course violates evolution's fundamental principle of fully undirected, randomized change and a filtering mechanism AKA natural selection to filter out the naff ideas.
Respecting each others base camps (and I can fully respect someone even if I disagree), I'd be interested in how you view those who posit a botched TOE that relies on a God to make it work as in, if there wasn't a God, evolution couldn't have happened, so somehow evolution must have proceeded with a "director-in-chief" calling the shots.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?