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.
So what? How is that a measure of complexity?
Maybe.
Returning to my point about clarity - it's very confusing when you say that science is not belief. It sounds like you're saying that no one believes in science or that science doesn't give us anything to believe in.
There's no known natural process for $100 bills to form on their own.We aren't discussing whether it formed but how. DNA is way more complex than paper and ink so it would make sense that if things can form from thin air that simple things would be first. I don't see any fossils of money laying around. It could be anything I'm just using money for the lol factor. Besides it's not like either of us or anyone else is going to prove how DNA formed.
I've already moved on. The most fierce tool of the atheist is the report button. There's hardly ever room for discussion without someone getting bent out of shape.
Yes that's true in particular instances. But the ToE is a universal theory about life on earth. It does not just attempt to explain particular data points, but all of life as we know it.
No, its not belief, its accepting physical reality.
Now, the philosophy of epistemology its quite complex and depending on which "school" you follow knowledge mean different things.
But its intellectualy dishonest to try to conflate epistemologial (sp?) knowledge with religious faith. It also brings forth a lot of other metaphysical problems.
Okay. So?
LOL! I presume you mean metaphysical naturalism. The way you wrote it struck me as funny.
I believe the point in dispute was that science is about pure empiricism. It's not. It makes much broader claims and forms theories based upon empirical data but also philosophical assumptions.
Really. In the english world, when we accept an idea we believe it to be true. Those terms mean the same thing.Not really.
You are oversimplifying to the point that youre performing a rhetorical equivocation.Accepting = believing.....
Pray tell, what is your point?Really. In the english world, when we accept an idea we believe it to be true. Those terms mean the same thing.
Can those right circumstances be created in a lab so that this can be observed? Or is this just theoretical?
Well sure, there are philosophical assumptions for which science has any real meaning. Things like assuming the universe exists, it is inherently objective and that we can interact with it.
One can certainly reject the philosophical bases by which science has any meaning. But so what?
Pray tell, what is your point?
There are plenty more assumptions that go into the big theories like the ToE. So what? Someone might accept the empirical data points but take issue with some of the larger assumptions and might reasonably come to reject scientific theories like the ToE.
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?