Vox Day's demolition of Darwin's Theory of Evolution

[RC Tent]

I suppose we'll just have to disagree I will remain with my claim that there is no elephant in my bedroom.

I agree that there is no physical elephant in your bedroom when you have nothing but an image of one in your mind.

I have said this.

It is your failure to see that a thought of an elephant in your mind is a reality - the thought exists - thoughts do exist - we can even own them - that is what intellectual property is. That is why it is illegal to make money off someone else's ideas, the law does not say "but that is just some thoughts, and science says they don't exist" - the law says "that is stealing, the originator of these ideas owns them and the money they are worth."

 

[Job 33:6]

I agree that there is no physical elephant in your bedroom when you have nothing but an image of one in your mind.

I have said this.

It is your failure to see that a thought of an elephant in your mind is a reality - the thought exists - thoughts do exist - we can even own them - that is what intellectual property is. That is why it is illegal to make money off someone else's ideas, the law does not say "but that is just some thoughts, and science says they don't exist" - the law says "that is stealing, the originator of these ideas owns them and the money they are worth."

But it isn't a reality beyond my mind. Which is the point.

And so when someone interprets scripture in their mind as suggesting that a global flood has occurred, they have to differentiate between their imagined ideas and external physical reality.

 

[Job 33:6]

God is external to us.

Our minds pick up on things that are external to us all the time.

The presence of another person, that is external to us, and it affects us, our feelings, our thoughts.

We interact with things that are not inside us - all the time.

And in regards to the elephant in the bedroom, there is nothing external.

 

[Job 33:6]

I have already said, reading poetry in braille is touching it - not that all braille is automatically poetry.

When you touch braille, you are not also touching poetry. Even in cases where the braille spells out a poem.

 

[RC Tent]

And in regards to the elephant in the bedroom, there is nothing external.

God is not a potentially physical elephant in anyone's room though.

 

[RC Tent]

But it isn't a reality beyond my mind. Which is the point.

And so when someone interprets scripture in their mind as suggesting that a global flood has occurred, they have to differentiate between their imagined ideas and external physical reality.

Why do they have to differentiate ?

 

[Job 33:6]

Why do they have to differentiate ?

They have to differentiate in cases where the two conflict because if they do not differentiate between imagined and physically real, they can mislead others.

For example,

Let's say person A imagines that there is an elephant in their bedroom. And let's say that, in physical reality, it's actually a horse.

And so they go around saying that they have detected an elephant in the bedroom.

Well, now people are out buying elephant saddles and buying peanuts for the elephant to eat. Maybe someone who really likes elephants shows up to pet it.

Then they find out that the persons imagined reality, contradicts physical reality. And they all realize that they've wasted time and money on efforts to see an elephant. And with the elephant only existing internally in their mind, nobody else can experience what they do.

 

[Job 33:6]

God is not a potentially physical elephant in anyone's room though.

Nobody here disbelieves in God. We are talking about concepts beyond God, such as intelligent design and evolution. Concepts that are more controversial to us.

 

[RC Tent]

Nobody here disbelieves in God. We are talking about concepts beyond God, such as intelligent design and evolution. Concepts that are more controversial to us.

"When you imagine something, you are not necessarily experiencing something beyond your own imagination. And when you imagine God, likewise, you are not necessarily doing so, either.

And so, basing your perception, around imagined ideas, I would say is dangerous. You would essentially be putting imagined ideas at a higher level of truth than physical experiences."

You are talking about God here, I believe that we agree that God is not a physical being.

You seem to deny that we can believe anything that goes on in our minds, unless it also exists in physical form. How are we supposed to conceive of God, and understand aspects of His existence, and love for us, without using our minds to do it? Are we to say that what we understand of Him is "not real" because it depends on our minds and is not physically extant?

You also seem to see truth as a thing that has different "levels".
As I see it a thing is either true or not - I see no levels.

 

[RC Tent]

They have to differentiate in cases where the two conflict because if they do not differentiate between imagined and physically real, they can mislead others.

For example,

Let's say person A imagines that there is an elephant in their bedroom. And let's say that, in physical reality, it's actually a horse.

And so they go around saying that they have detected an elephant in the bedroom.

Well, now people are out buying elephant saddles and buying peanuts for the elephant to eat. Maybe someone who really likes elephants shows up to pet it.

Then they find out that the persons imagined reality, contradicts physical reality. And they all realize that they've wasted time and money on efforts to see an elephant. And with the elephant only existing internally in their mind, nobody else can experience what they do.

If people choose a philosophical perspective that does not regard science as a reality monitor - if they prefer that the Bible is their reality monitor, and they say so, then they are not calling an elephant a horse, they are calling the Bible their guide. The Bible is not an exclusively internal thing, it does not exist only in their mind.

 

[Job 33:6]

I never said that someone could not believe in things in their mind. I am saying that what we believe and imagine, weather real or not, should not be placed on equal grounds with concepts corroborated with physical reality, with respect to what we conclude is truth. And what we believe and imagine, certainly should not take precedence over that which is corroborated with physical reality, in scenarios in which the two conflict with one another.

Otherwise everyone is free to believe whatever they want, I just don't think it's a wise idea of putting beliefs over objective physical reality, especially in situations in which physical reality conflicts with internally imagined ideas.

 

[Job 33:6]

If people choose a philosophical perspective that does not regard science as a reality monitor - if they prefer that the Bible is their reality monitor, and they say so, then they are not calling an elephant a horse, they are calling the Bible their guide. The Bible is not an exclusively internal thing, it does not exist only in their mind.

I would say that they are calling a horse and elephant. Assuming that a horse is physically present in the bedroom, the horse by definition of what it is has certain physically corroborated properties. And if someone's imagined idea takes precedence over corroborated physical properties, thereby resulting in the redefinition of what the animal is, then they are essentially lying to themselves. young Earth creationist ignore physical properties that make objects what they are by their definition.

For example, young Earth creationist suggest that meanders of the Grand canyon were carved out by high energy flood waters. However, to derive such a conclusion one has to ignore the physical properties that make the canyon the canyon. They do this while simultaneously placing perceived and imagined ideas in priority over physically corroborated qualities of the canyon.

And with that it really doesn't matter what their source of belief is. whether their source is from the Bible or any other religious book or any science book or any other textbook, the moment they take their perceived and imagines internal idea and put it as priority over physically corroborated qualities of reality, they have made a mistake.

 

[RC Tent]

I would say that they are calling a horse and elephant. Assuming that a horse is physically present in the bedroom, the horse by definition of what it is has certain physically corroborated properties. .

This is not a case of one person and their individual mind with no other authority involved. They are not saying that something is so just because they said so, or just because they perceived it, they are citing the Bible.

Your perception that people are "lying to themselves" is nothing more than imaginary isn't it? Can you verify it with scientific method? Or is it just something that is going on in your mind - therefore, actually in your opinion, not real?

 

[RC Tent]

And with that it really doesn't matter what their source of belief is.

I believe it does.

 

[Job 33:6]

This is not a case of one person and their individual mind with no other authority involved. They are not saying that something is so just because they said so, or just because they perceived it, they are citing the Bible.

Your perception that people are "lying to themselves" is nothing more than imaginary isn't it? Can you verify it with scientific method? Or is it just something that is going on in your mind - therefore, actually in your opinion, not real?

We live in an interactive society where people share ideas and depend on one another in life. We don't live in individual bubbles of our individual imaginations. Most of the time, I wouldn't mind if someone put their imagination before physical reality. But eventually we bump heads simply because we live in a connected society.

And yes, I know they're citing the Bible, but at the end of the day, their perception isn't grounded in physical reality. They are really just citing their imagined idea of scripture, not necessarily the physical reality behind scripture.

And my perception that they're lying to themselves is grounded in corroborated physical reality. I don't set the rules, God has already set the rules in creation of our physically real planet Earth.

And nothing I do or say or believe, can change what God has created. That which is corroborated in physical reality through testing and observation.

Nobody can change the external reality of the existance of Braille. But we can imagine differences with respect to internal imagined bedroom elephants, which is what YECs are doing. And they're taking their internal imagined ideas, and considering them as more real than external physical reality.

And naturally, as Christians, we all have the opinion that God is on our side. But at the end of the day, one side is contradicting the qualities of God's physically corroborated creation, in favor of an internally imagined perception.

And in some cases, what we imagine is real. But in some cases it simply isn't. And if it contradicts physical reality, that should be a red flag.

 

[RC Tent]

And my perception that they're lying to themselves is grounded in corroborated physical reality.

No it is not, it is about their minds - it is just you imagining what is going on in their minds with your own mind. It is not real, by your own standards for reality, it doesn't exist.

If you are going to insist on expecting other people to restrict their beliefs about physical reality - then the same applies to you, therefore you cannot accuse them of lying, there is no physical objective test you can apply to their minds.

 

[RC Tent]

And naturally, as Christians, we all have the opinion that God is on our side.

On technical issues, I don't think so. He is on our side in offering us His love, it is not about making us right about everything.

 

[Job 33:6]

No it is not, it is about their minds - it is just you imagining what is going on in their minds with your own mind. It is not real, by your own standards for reality, it doesn't exist.

If you are going to insist on expecting other people to restrict their beliefs about physical reality - then the same applies to you, therefore you cannot accuse them of lying, there is no physical objective test you can apply to their minds.

By my standards of reality, things corroborated through testing an observation, are real.

For example, I consider quartzite to be a dense rock. I can take quartzite and I can attempt to cut it with a saw, and I recognize it as more difficult to cut, than say a mudstone. Quartzite has qualities which make it a quaetzite as well, such as a high percentage of quartz.

And I can derive that a rock is quartzite, and that a quartzitei is dense, through my own experience. I can then examine research and publications on granite from others, I can talk to other geologists about quartzite, and I can confirm that we all have observed the same thing.

But, when a young earth Creationists concludes that quartzite can fault and break in certain ways while existing as individual grains unmetamorphosed sand, they've then separated themselves from what is physically corroborated. They've taken an imaginary idea, and have given it priority over what we see and test and know quartzite to be.

And the above is a real example.

 

[RC Tent]

By my standards of reality, things corroborated through testing an observation, are real.

You have not tested and observed inside other people's minds with physical science.

 

[The Barbarian]

ou have not tested and observed inside other people's minds with physical science.

Mind Aglow: Scientists Watch Thoughts Form in the Brain