stevestory
Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005
|
[QUOTE] | Quote | 58
Barry Arrington
September 9, 2015 at 2:54 pm
RDFish has been asked three times now to identify something that is not mass/energy or space/time. He has not. Each time he has dug deeper into monist mysticism. End of discussion.
|
| Quote |
59
RDFish
September 9, 2015 at 3:08 pm
Barry Arrington has steadfastly refused to acknowledge that I have explained that mass, energy, space, and time – as well as locality, causality, and realism – no longer have the meanings in physics that they have in common usage, and had in classical physics, due to the revolution in physics at the turn of the 20th century.
Barry wants his dualist mysticism to somehow trump monist mysticism, and won’t admit that neither constitutes a scientific result. Barry wants to end the discussion because he can’t actually respond to the issues I raise.
*Edited to add:
Here is a partial list of my points that Barry has dodged:
1) I responded many times to his question regarding concepts in physics.
2) He brought up mind/body ontology, not me.
3) Religious people in the 18th century were still invoking intelligent agency as the cause of lightning, and there are many other examples of ID being offered as a catch-all explanation when the actual solution was not understood.
4) Science changes to fit the data, religion doesn’t.
5) Scientific results require actual empirical support, not just a preference for one poorly supported answer over another.
6) Barry’s “conclusions” about God contradict a good deal of empirical evidence
7) He ignores the fact that many religious people deny his conclusions about God, including apophatic Christians. |
linky
|
