2,002
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 330:
Line 330: + + + + +
→Social effects of Creationist ideas
[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 07:49, 6 February 2008 (EST)
[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 07:49, 6 February 2008 (EST)
:If you want an accessible introduction to the condemnations of 1277 look here [http://www.economist.com/diversions/millennium/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=346780]. A better introduction can be found here [http://sammelpunkt.philo.at:8080/1254/]. Chapter six for example explicitly refers to what we discuss, but it's in German. But to summarize, and the economist mentions it too, the idea that God couldn't do something, like changing the laws of nature, was forbidden.
:You assume that there exist such a thing as "Christian principles". And then not in the platonic universe, but in reality. In reality the Christian principles are what Christians say they are. Especially if you claim the knowledge that Europeans had of these principles caused modern science to emerge in Europe. It then only matters what Europeans thought they would be. And we know that they thought differently. And we have no way to determine in advance which interpretation is the correct one; all you offer is hindsight.
:The capital G god, is a god. So, you are right that it is not a synonym, and God is a particular instance of a deity. But it still correct to call it a deity, as you say yourself. But what is your point? If it is a property of deities that the can change laws, then it should be in particular be a property of an omnipotent deity.
:If it's not a game, then it is probably a mistake that you us the word with different meanings. Doesn't make your argument correct.
:You claimed before that lack of design implies that it must be chance. And we are now talking about "chance" with the meaning of "Probability", but you should know that the difference between the two uses of the word chance by now. If something happens by "chance" it can mean without purpose, or with a certain probability. So, I asked you before, and I am waiting for a few month now, to give me a single example, where lack of design lead to a random event. A single instant. I am not even asking you to prove your general claim that lack of design leads to chance, but just for a single example. [[User:Order|Order]] 09:23, 6 February 2008 (EST)
== Cdesign proponentsists ==
== Cdesign proponentsists ==