oldmanintheskydidntdoit
Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006
|
Clive is even more senile via the IDiot generator:
| Quote | | It could be changed or guided or directed; since we don’t see the logical necessity behind it, we have no assurance that it couldn’t have been otherwise, or that these observations haven’t been, or couldn’t have been, different in the character of nature. The supreme irony is that the only things we really do understand, that is, see the reasonableness of why any two things are connected as physical events in the singularity before the Big Bang, then yes, the conditions of nature as we understand nature as we understand nature as we find them now, would’ve been a totally foreign nature, akin to a miracle. it is a logical contradiction for anything in nature to have a point. , Methodological naturalism presupposes that we understand nature as we understand nature as we find them now, would’ve been a totally foreign nature, akin to a miracle. it is a confusion to consider observations as real understandings of the character of nature. So, yes, nature is a logical fallacy. So our “understanding” of nature is based solely and purely on observations, not on any logical necessity, stuck or frozen in their character. It could be changed or guided or directed; since we don’t see the reasonableness of why any two things are connected as physical events in the same way. The simple test is to ask yourself if it is a confusion to consider observations as real understandings of the character of nature. The supreme irony is that the only things we really do understand, that is, see the reasonableness behind, don’t physically exist, like mathematics, morality, and logic. |
Or is that a "real" quote.....
--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK
if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings
|
) 
