2,002
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 282:
Line 282: + + + +
→Social effects of Creationist ideas
::::::: My comments about America and Christianity are something I've heard a few times, but I can't add much to. But I was not talking particularly about America ''today'', and even today, much of the American culture owes its origins to a Christian worldview, even though many people now reject that basis.
::::::: My comments about America and Christianity are something I've heard a few times, but I can't add much to. But I was not talking particularly about America ''today'', and even today, much of the American culture owes its origins to a Christian worldview, even though many people now reject that basis.
::::::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:34, 3 February 2008 (EST)
::::::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:34, 3 February 2008 (EST)
::::::::Artistole might be pre-christian, but he won out over alterntaive Greek philosophers, because his views were thought to be most compatible with a literal reading of the bible. Aristoteles defenders weren't adherents of Greek religions, but Christians too. The establishment, also in science, was Christian, too.
::::::::And indeed there were those that did both, read the bible and did research. But even with Newton, who had good and bad ideas, it is obvious that his great contributions were those that he derived from observations of nature.
::::::::I still don't see that I had any of their philosophies wrong. Their were naturalists, and not literalists. If you however agree with the sentiment that "There is no reason to take recourse to the heavens" in science, then we got to an agreement.
::::::::The US has indeed quite some impressive European heritage. [[User:Order|Order]] 09:04, 3 February 2008 (EST)