Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
→‎Putting Conservapedia's Law in perspective: Conservatism is logic and faith. Aren't both boundless?
Line 63: Line 63:  
:::::::::If we accept that at the time of Adam (pre Fall) conservatism was infinite, then even with the observed geometric expansion of conservatism observed and described as ''Conservapedia's law'', it is not possible for conservatism to reach that level again. This ties nicely in with the teaching of the Bible, that the Creation was perfect and sin-free initially, but due to the Fall such a level of perfection/conservatism cannot be reattained. [[User:MikeOxlong|MikeOxlong]] 19:24, 24 March 2011 (EDT)
 
:::::::::If we accept that at the time of Adam (pre Fall) conservatism was infinite, then even with the observed geometric expansion of conservatism observed and described as ''Conservapedia's law'', it is not possible for conservatism to reach that level again. This ties nicely in with the teaching of the Bible, that the Creation was perfect and sin-free initially, but due to the Fall such a level of perfection/conservatism cannot be reattained. [[User:MikeOxlong|MikeOxlong]] 19:24, 24 March 2011 (EDT)
   −
::::::::::Very well put, Mike.  Note that extrapolating 100 generations into the future is implausible view that may be the result of a belief in an Old Earth.  In fact, there's no logical reason to expect more than a few generations into the future.  See, e.g., [[Counterexamples to an Old Earth]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:13, 24 March 2011 (EDT)
+
::::::::::Very well put, Mike.  Note that extrapolating 100 generations into the future is an implausible view that may be the result of a belief in an Old Earth.  In fact, there's no logical reason to expect more than a few generations into the future.  See, e.g., [[Counterexamples to an Old Earth]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:13, 24 March 2011 (EDT)
 
:::::::::::I guess I don't accept the premise that conservatism is infinite. I believe being conservative is similar to being sinless: can you get any more sinless than not sinning? How can you get any more conservative than conservative? In terms of the graphs, a graph of conservatism would have an asymptote representing conservatism before the Fall - a level we can approach (maybe even meet), but not exceed. Conserapedia's Law does not predict such an asymptote for the growth of conservatism.
 
:::::::::::I guess I don't accept the premise that conservatism is infinite. I believe being conservative is similar to being sinless: can you get any more sinless than not sinning? How can you get any more conservative than conservative? In terms of the graphs, a graph of conservatism would have an asymptote representing conservatism before the Fall - a level we can approach (maybe even meet), but not exceed. Conserapedia's Law does not predict such an asymptote for the growth of conservatism.
 
:::::::::::What is the argument that conservatism is infinite? [[User:BradB|BradB]] 20:27, 24 March 2011 (EDT)
 
:::::::::::What is the argument that conservatism is infinite? [[User:BradB|BradB]] 20:27, 24 March 2011 (EDT)
 +
 +
:::::::::::: Conservatism is [[logic]] and [[faith]].  Aren't both boundless?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:39, 24 March 2011 (EDT)
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,906

edits

Navigation menu