Albatrossity2
Posts: 2780
Joined: Mar. 2007
|
On the latest O'Dreary post re David Brooks' recent musings on mind and soul and neurobiology, commenter allanius (I still think that the "i" in his name is a mistake), tards out | Quote | (quoting Brooks)“…people are equipped to experience the sacred, to have moments of elevated experience when they transcend boundaries and overflow with love.”
“People are equipped” to experience love is a meaningless statement from the materialist point of view but potentially quite meaningful if it is true that: a) humankind was created in the image of God; b) “God is love”; and c) “Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God.” |
Besides the overt scriptural search for justification, this is a remarkably ignorant statement, even by UD standards. Yep, there's no "materialist" explanation for human emotional attachments to mates, children, and other family members (aka "love"). It's simply meaningless from the "materialist" point of view. So clearly, goddidit.
What an ignorant git...
--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
- Pattiann Rogers
|
