Hi y'all - correct, but I don't know what a "grok" is.
On Sep 17, 5:25 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think I grok clog...so, about what you quoted above: "Physical
> theories alone do not define, predict or explain the emergence of life
> in the universe."... to you is NOT the case? And, you find that
> physical theories *alone* DO define, predict or explain the emergence
> of life in the universe?
>
> On Sep 17, 2:44 pm, Clogtowner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi y'all - quite the reverse, I disagree with the statement.
> > Scientific (physical) theories do define the emergence of life in the
> > universe. I'm happy with Dawkins' Goldilocks planet and Dennett's
> > description of the beginnings of life on this planet in "Darwin's
> > Dangerous Idea." These scientifice theories need no assistance.
>
> > On Sep 17, 4:05 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > clog, not sure I understand your point. As best as I can tell, you are
> > > agreeing that physical theories alone do not define, predict or
> > > explain...if you want to expand some it would help me.
>
> > > On Sep 17, 8:22 am, Clogtowner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > Hi y'all - yes that is an interesting article. I don't fully agree by
> > > > any means and I choose one of the main themes to nit pick: "Physical
> > > > theories alone do not define, predict or explain the emergence of life
> > > > in the
> > > > universe." If we are searching for absolutes, then of course, I agree
> > > > with the preceding statement, but given overwhelming evidence
> > > > accompanying a scientific theory, I feel that the emergence of life in
> > > > the universe is defined (its in the bible!)
>
> > > > On Sep 16, 3:40 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > For what I see as a rather balanced view of 'gaps', I strongly suggest
> > > > > this short article by Alan Wallace, "Materialism of the Gaps."
>
> > > > >http://www.sbinstitute.com/PDF%20AW.org/sctheo.pdf
>
> > > > > It is in pdf format. If you have to use html use this
> > > > > link.http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:Ye8StlnCWlsJ:www.sbinstitute.com...
>
> > > > > On Sep 16, 12:56 pm, Isparklaria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Sep 16, 12:19 pm, "Jason (Memphis)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > > wrote
>
> > > > > > > That reference on p. 28 is calling out the pseudo-science in New
> > > > > > > Age
> > > > > > > religions.
>
> > > > > > I agree that it is common for proponnents of New Age ideas,
> > > > > > practices,
> > > > > > religions and so forth to use gaps in scientific understanding as
> > > > > > "proof" of their opinions. In this they resemble many other
> > > > > > dogmatists. However the second part of that statment does not negate
> > > > > > the first half, which reads, "These conundrums, which ought indeed
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > make us reexamine any scientific dogmas we may embrace.” Jason, do
> > > > > > you
> > > > > > suppose that Price is saying science has dogmas or do you think
> > > > > > that I
> > > > > > have interpreted correctly by saying that he really means
> > > > > > scientistic
> > > > > > dogmas?
>
> > > > > > On Sep 16, 12:19 pm, "Jason (Memphis)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Most of the books that I read are science and philosophy--only a
> > > > > > > few
> > > > > > > are mostly skeptical.
>
> > > > > > > Price is more in line with the way I look at these alternative
> > > > > > > religions.
>
> > > > > > > That reference on p. 28 is calling out the pseudo-science in New
> > > > > > > Age
> > > > > > > religions.
>
> > > > > > > I wasn't calling you out either but I did remember our debates
> > > > > > > about
> > > > > > > Martin Gardner, Carl Sagan, CSICOPs and so forth and thought that
> > > > > > > Price might be in that category.
>
> > > > > > > Jason
>
> > > > > > > On Sep 16, 11:07 am, Isparklaria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On Sep 15, 8:27 am, "Jason (Memphis)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >I thought that Michael would be turned
> > > > > > > > > off by book because it goes after "New Thought" and "New Age"
> > > > > > > > > religions.
>
> > > > > > > > Jason,
>
> > > > > > > > I thought that you might not like the book because it is more
> > > > > > > > philosophically oriented, rather than just being skeptical. In
> > > > > > > > addition to just challenging idealistic monistic metaphysics,
> > > > > > > > new age
> > > > > > > > interpretations of quantum mechanics and other physics, new age
> > > > > > > > extrapolations from quantum mechanics and other poor examples of
> > > > > > > > reasoning by new age/new thought adherents, the author also
> > > > > > > > challenges
> > > > > > > > scientistic dogmas (he calls them scientific dogmas). He says,
> > > > > > > > in the
> > > > > > > > middle of the first paragraph of on page twenty eight, in
> > > > > > > > reference to
> > > > > > > > the mysteries of quantum mechanics,” These conundrums, which
> > > > > > > > ought
> > > > > > > > indeed to make us reexamine any scientific dogmas we may
> > > > > > > > embrace.”
>
> > > > > > > > On the other hand, I have noticed that as I have become more
> > > > > > > > realistic
> > > > > > > > about new age nonsense, you also have seemed to recognize the
> > > > > > > > limits
> > > > > > > > of scientism and pseudo skepticism. For that reason you may
> > > > > > > > like a
> > > > > > > > book that rightly points out there is often some good in new age
> > > > > > > > religions. The author even likes the Bible, though he is an
> > > > > > > > atheist. I
> > > > > > > > can understand his feeling since I like the Bible and don’t
> > > > > > > > believe in
> > > > > > > > its crazy bully of a god either. Actually I do believe that I AM
> > > > > > > > exists, but I AM is not God, a god, a goddess an angel or
> > > > > > > > anything
> > > > > > > > else like that. What I Am is, in my opinion, is so obvious that
> > > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > most people miss it. The secret is hidden in plain sight, where
> > > > > > > > no one
> > > > > > > > dares to look
>
> > > > > > > > On Sep 15, 8:27 am, "Jason (Memphis)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > the book that we are reading for book club (Top Secret by
> > > > > > > > > Robert
> > > > > > > > > Price)
>
> > > > > > > > > The first chapter was good. I thought that Michael would be
> > > > > > > > > turned
> > > > > > > > > off by book because it goes after "New Thought" and "New Age"
> > > > > > > > > religions. In some of these alternative religions, your
> > > > > > > > > mental powers
> > > > > > > > > or mind influences the environment around you by vibrating
> > > > > > > > > your
> > > > > > > > > surrounding with sort mind beam that helps you control your
> > > > > > > > > surrounding (or some other mind control of your
> > > > > > > > > surroundings). Most
> > > > > > > > > people would just think that positive thinking and
> > > > > > > > > persistance helps
> > > > > > > > > you "do" or "say" the right things to get what you want--not
> > > > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > some sort of mystical mental energy on your surroundings to
> > > > > > > > > control
> > > > > > > > > it.
>
> > > > > > > > > Regardless, the book "The Secret" (not Top Secret) and New
> > > > > > > > > Thought/New
> > > > > > > > > Age religions are very popular in some circles and parts of
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > country.
>
> > > > > > > > > Jason- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Memphis Freethought Alliance" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
