RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (37) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: No reason for a rift between science and religion?, Skeptic's chance to prove his claims.< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
BWE



Posts: 1902
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2007,14:31   

Quote (Louis @ Aug. 30 2007,12:15)
Or even, for the sake of completeness Steve, if I have made a mistake Skeptic/Lenny could point that out. Using things like quotes from my posts and explanations of where the mistake is, you know, things like that. Of course this would rely on them actually dealing with the arguments I have made, which both of them are statedly unwilling to do. Such a dilemma!

After all, as I am a mere pitiable, reductionist, biased, fundamentalist, materialist, atheist my mistakes should be easy to find and point out.

Right?

I wonder why, when these erudite and intellectually honest gentlemen who never misunderstand an argument, raise straw men or quote mine have me on the ropes, they don't actually point out where the error is.

I think it's because they are above such petty things as reason and evidence.

Louis

OK. I see two errors.

One: Lenny's point wasn't particularly complicated nor necessarily sophisticated but for some reason he couldn't just go over the edge and say it: maybe some kind of a restatement of Gödel's theorum, Emotion is what makes us tick and all science can do is quantify our experiences, it cannot measure them because the actual scale is subjective. Even though Louis's point of defining the terms to make them make sense is valid, it does not address what I saw as the underlying problem lenny was addressing. Which is, the only way to find the answer to a subjective question is to ask the subject. We have to learn to believe or not believe the results based on many things but we can't ever use them to assume truth the same way we can know how many neurons it takes to screw in a light bulb.

And two: Lenny mixed up the marbles or stirred the beans or whatever when he equated religion with subjective truth. He didn't notice that he'd done it and you all thought he did. Oops. I'm betting he basically meant that science can only make a map of the landscape, it cannot be the landscape.

All in all though, some impressive obtuseness, insults and skeptic-isms in there so far. We'll see. I'll have to pick it back up on monday.

--------------
Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

The Daily Wingnut

   
  1091 replies since Aug. 06 2007,07:39 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (37) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]