Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Wolf wrote-

Quote:

Which is why it cannot be taught in American schools and why it has no place in science.

Granted as long as you accept there is no such thing as social science.Which I don't.

0 Replies

Wolf wrote-

Quote:

Quote:
Won't students project it into the social realm for themselves? They get constantly reminded that we are animals.

No student I've talked to has done that so far. The reason? They are taught other things that would help prevent such psychotic reasoning.

Maybe they are thick or are not paying attention or don't give a f**k. One should beware of offering reasons which suit one's own arguments.One can easily begin to think of others as "psychotic" if one allows oneself such easy self indulgencies as inventing one's own reasons.

0 Replies

Steve wrote-

Quote:

Setanta wrote:
I'd not have stopped in myself, had i not seen the name of our esteemed colleague Steve . . .

Back to the wall Steve.Evolutionists are amoral.Any port in a storm.

0 Replies

Wolf wrote-

Quote:

That guy thought that because we couldn't change his mind, he had won.

That's nothing like me.

You could change my mind as easy as falling off the logging camp whore if you could give me some idea of what it would look like in the real world instead of all this abstract,pie-in-the sky idealism that isn't connected to anything.

I'm going to bed to snuggle up.I'm half pissed anyway.

0 Replies

You sure that's not half soused? LOL

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

Steve wrote-

Quote:
Setanta wrote:
I'd not have stopped in myself, had i not seen the name of our esteemed colleague Steve . . .

Back to the wall Steve.Evolutionists are amoral.Any port in a storm.

You must be drunk because the phrase "Evolutionsts are amoral" has no real evidence backing it up and isn't true at all. The only person equating evolution with social science is you.

0 Replies

Wolf wrote-

Quote:

"Evolutionsts are amoral" has no real evidence backing it up and isn't true at all.

I meant "evolutionists".I didn't mean anybody claiming to be one.It is quite common for religionists or socialists to be accused of acting the part for various reasons. I don't see why avowed evolutionists should be exempt from a similar critique particularly when their common social behaviour often runs counter to evolutionary principles in any number of settings.

A real evolutionist is amoral.

0 Replies

No, no, spendi. You're right. I'm a gravitationist and I believe that planes must not fly and spaceships must not rise up into space. It goes against the Laws of Gravity.

0 Replies

Wolf?

Sucker . . .

0 Replies

Quote:

A real evolutionist is amoral.

Explain spendius.

Where do you come up with this asinine idea that evolutionists don't know nor care right from wrong; that they don't care about morality?

0 Replies

Gravity is amoral.That's a tautology.Nothing about gravity has anything to do with morality.

Evolution is amoral and everything significant about it has everything to do with morality.

Hence the argument about evolution and the absence of argument about gravity or any other scientific concept.

On reflection one might be able to squeeze morality into your spaceship idea by contrasting what the cost of overcoming gravity is,not defying it of course,with what other uses that money might have been put to.

Does it automatically follow that the increasing efficiency of power units results in spaceships rather than in better housing for the poor and isn't the reason that it has done something to do with a religious feeling associated with national pride or a religious DNA in our culture.Were both those factors the theme of President Kennedy's famous speech.The rhetoric was religious.In the Soviet Union the rhetoric would be on paper in officialese and would have gone down like a lead balloon with Americans.

They do usually play soundtracks of religiously toned music when we see film from space.

0 Replies

xingu wrote-

Quote:

Where do you come up with this asinine idea that evolutionists don't know nor care right from wrong; that they don't care about morality?

I have explained aspects of that back down the thread.Perhaps you missed it.It is a long thread to read I'll admit and there's some pretty dire stuff to wade through if you should try it.

By the way-the insertion of "asinine" weakens your point.It's uncool really.I can answer the question with it in or not but your use of it tacitly grants me permission to use a different,maybe uncool, style.I sometimes allow such things to goad me and I sometimes don't.It depends how I'm feeling I suppose.

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

By the way-the insertion of "asinine" weakens your point.It's uncool really.

How so?

Quote:

I can answer the question with it in or not but your use of it tacitly grants me permission to use a different,maybe uncool, style.

I should think no such situation pertains.

Quote:

I sometimes allow such things to goad me and I sometimes don't. It depends how I'm feeling I suppose.

Apparently, your philosophy depends far more on what you feel than on what you know.

But for the strain the endeavor might impose upon one of arrogant, disingenuous, ignorant, inane, fatuous, foolish, silly, vacuous, utterly mulish nature, one might benefit through aprising oneself of the definition, derivation and etymology of the word "Asinine".

0 Replies

timber wrote-

Quote:

spendius wrote:
By the way-the insertion of "asinine" weakens your point.It's uncool really.

How so?

Well-it shows non-objectivity in this usage which is pejoritative.It is incorrect because asses don't have ideas so there can be no such thing as an "asinine idea" and if there was,me being a human,I couldn't have one.But the reason I gave at first suffices on its own. It hints at an over-excited state of mind which is "uncool".I think.

Quote:

Quote:
I can answer the question with it in or not but your use of it tacitly grants me permission to use a different,maybe uncool, style.

I should think no such situation pertains.

Are you suggesting that I can't alter my style or that I can't give the explanation of where the idea that evolutionists,as evolutionists I mean, are amoral came from.Evolutionists in non-evolutionist mode may very well care about morality but the danger is that if they can choose which mode to be in at any one time they are likely to use that choice to their own advantage and often without others being aware of it.Trying to take advantage of such unawareness does rather underestimate the others.

Quote:

Apparently, your philosophy depends far more on what you feel than on what you know.

That's a human weakness from which many of us suffer.

Quote:

But for the strain the endeavor might impose upon one of arrogant, disingenuous, ignorant, inane, fatuous, foolish, silly, vacuous, utterly mulish nature, one might benefit through aprising oneself of the definition, derivation and etymology of the word "Asinine".

Any sensible person with such characteristics would assuredly look to you timber to provide the definition,the derivation and the etymology of such a posh word.

As the obvious expert in such matters perhaps you will provide us with them.

0 Replies

Thinking about it I have actually seen asses behaving in an uncool fashion.

0 Replies

Spendius

You made the statement;

Quote:

Evolutionists are amoral.

That is asinine; a stupid statement. You are categorizing a whole group of people as being without morals.

Quote:

Evolutionists in non-evolutionist mode may very well care about morality but the danger is that if they can choose which mode to be in at any one time they are likely to use that choice to their own advantage and often without others being aware of it.Trying to take advantage of such unawareness does rather underestimate the others.

Your explanation is ridiculous. Are you suggesting that an evolutionist at dinner time with his family is moral but the next morning, while examining the skull of a Homo erectus, he's immoral?

Quote:

It is incorrect because asses don't have ideas so there can be no such thing as an "asinine idea" and if there was,me being a human,I couldn't have one.

Asinie idea has nothing to do with donkeys. An asinine idea is a stupid idea. Ignorant people can easily dream up stupid (asinine) ideas.
When the word asses is applied to humans it means a vain, self-important, silly, or aggressively stupid person.

It should be evident to you that when I used the word asinine I was not referring to the genus Equus but to a Homo sapien.

0 Replies

xingu-

Immoral and amoral are not the same.

We will have to differ on whether your un-necessary use of asinine in that context is vain,self important,silly and (not 'or' I presume) aggressively stupid. It is somewhat aggressive I think at the least.

I fully understand if you don't agree.Naturally.

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

xingu-

Immoral and amoral are not the same.

We will have to differ on whether your un-necessary use of asinine in that context is vain,self important,silly and (not 'or' I presume) aggressively stupid. It is somewhat aggressive I think at the least.

I fully understand if you don't agree.Naturally.

Absolutely correct spendius. Immoral is against morality while amoral is neither moral nor immoral, indifferent.

0 Replies

My mistake. So your saying they are indifferent to right and wrong when they are on the job but are moral when at home with their family. And they turn their morality on and off like a water spigot.

Right. sure.

0 Replies

xingu-

No-I explained that.The ones who turn it on and off are just half-baked evolutionists.They are using a bit of evolution only when it serves their purpose and when it doesn't they close their eyes like a little girl in the cinema when the big black monster rears up from the deeps and there's no St George about.

A real evolutionist would observe a disco or a wedding in an objective light which is quite different from observing it subjectively.He would then learn of the social value of ritual and ceremony and possibly compare those in a religious society with those of an atheistic society.Imaginary realisations of both have been used in any number of movies to help people to choose which one they prefer.

In a small number of professions it is necessary to be able to switch back and forth for peace of mind.

0 Replies

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know