Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Materialism

2007-04-04T18:12:02Z

Mark444:

'Materialism' is an ontological position which holds that is no immaterial or spiritual realm. Only things which are detectable in some form by the senses and sense experience- for instance [[forks]], [[matter]], [[radiation]], [[heat]], [[neutrinos]], [[galaxies]], and so forth. It assumed by the position of [[empiricism]], and therefore [[science]], and is contrasted with [[substance dualism]] and [[immaterialism]]. Arguments for materialism commonly employ [[ontological principles]] such as [[Occam's Razor]]- as an immaterial realm is wholly superfluous to our understanding of the world, we have no reason to believe it exists.

[[Category: Philosophy]]

Principle of Proportionality

2007-03-28T00:23:31Z

Mark444:

Proposed by [[Hume]] and summarised in his famous quote 'A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence', The Principle of Proportionality is a [[ontological]] and [[epistemological]] [[principle]] generally considered central to all forms of [[inductive reasoning]]- ie, science, theology, philosophy, and logic. It holds that the act of valuing, trusting, or believing in something is not a discrete state- we can value, trust, or believe in some things more than others. For instance, a person might believe in both the existence of aliens and existence of tables, based on a body of evidence he is presented with. However, it is clear that there is far more evidence for the existence of tables than the existence of aliens- so, the person should recognise that their belief in tables has a stronger foundation, and is hence a stronger belief, than their belief in aliens.

The Principle of Proportionality is particularly useful when the agent is attempting to integrate a discordant belief into their mental framework. For example, suppose a person is a [[materialist]] based on past evidence and experience, and is then suddenly confronted with a substantial body of evidence supporting the existence of [[immaterial]] [[ghosts]]. Although this new evidence may appear persuasive, Hume argues that in order for this new, contradictory belief to be rationally accepted, it must 'overthrow' the entire incumbent weight of evidence showing the existence of ghosts to be [[impossible]]. Ie, so many of our day-to-day, implicit beliefs (such as the existence of tables) rely on an empirical framework to be effective, that each effectively adds weight to the bulk of evidence supporting empiricism. He goes on to implicitly argue that, as [[empiricism]] has such a large, richly interconnected pattern of theories, that the likelihood of anything thus far undiscovered overthrowing of this incumbent body of evidence is exceedingly remote.

[[Category: Ontological Principles]]

Occam's razor

2007-03-28T00:20:14Z

Mark444: Still not a fundamental assumption :). In order to fundamentally assume the argument was correct as is, you'd have to fundamentally assume all its fundamental assumptions- its circular

Ockham's Razor is one of the most widely used [[ontological principle|ontological principles]] in all fields of applied logic, most notably [[philosophy]], [[theology]], and [[systemology]]. It is attributed to [[William of Ockham]], an English Franciscan Friar who lived in the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centirues. Briefly, it can be stated as follows:

'From any set of equally probable explanations, we should assume the one which makes the least [[fundamental assumptions]] is correct, until we have reason to believe otherwise'

This is different from the shortest explanation, the shortest logical argument, and the simplest explanation, and the razor is often incorrectly quoted and/or applied. Some people have argued that these criteria qualify as better principles than the razor.

Ockham's razor can be illustrated be the following common example. A tree is found uprooted in the middle of a field with no apparent cause. Two people offer competing hypotheses for how this occured. Person A says that there must have been a storm last night, which combined with heavy rainfall the previous day, resulted in the uprooting of the tree. Person B says that last night aliens visited the planet Earth, and uprooted the tree as a message to mankind. There is no way of determining which of these hypotheses is correct after the fact, but as A's hypothesis makes far fewer fundamental assumptions (basically that the planet Earth has weather) than B's hypothesis (basically that aliens exist, have a way of finding humans in the cosmos, have a way of traversing space to reach our planet, could topple such a tree without being noticed, and so forth), we should assume A is correct and that a storm felled the tree unless B can provide some other evidence to support their claim.

[[John Wisdom]] and [[Anthony Flew]] indirectly use the razor in [[The Parable of the Gardener]].

Among its practical applications, Occam's Razor has been used by both sides in the debate between theism and atheism, correctly by the atheists. Let us take for an example the origin of intelligent life on Earth. The development of intelligent life can be explained very well by Charles Darwin's theory of evolution via natural selection. However, many theists postulate God as another transcendental cause. Advocates of the Anthropic Principle might contend that evolution is the means through which God works. However, Occam's Razor allows us to eliminate God from the hypothesis, since the idea is an unnecessary assumption. The 'simpler' explanation (that which makes fewer fundamental assumptions) is that God had nothing to do with the development of Intelligent Life and that it came about as a result of natural processes. Therefore, the latter explanation is the most reasonable to believe.

<ref>http://skepdic.com/occam.html</ref>

[[Category:Ontological Principles]]

Category:Arguments for the existence of God

2007-03-28T00:18:35Z

Mark444: New page: An argument for the existence of God is an attempt to prove the ontological existence of a being or beings which meet the definition of or deserve the title of 'God'. Many such arguments h...

An argument for the existence of God is an attempt to prove the ontological existence of a being or beings which meet the definition of or deserve the title of 'God'. Many such arguments have been proposed throughout history- with varying degrees of success.

Ontological argument

2007-03-28T00:17:06Z

Mark444: This might seem biased to the uninitiated, but there's very little which can be said in defense of this argument. Feel free to have a go though!

The ontological argument is a failed attempt to argue for the existence of God. It is a [[deductive]] argument based on the [[defintion of God]], originally proposed by [[Anselm]] and later used by [[Descartes]]. Anselm's form runs as follows:

God is the most supremely perfect being- a being with all possible perfections

It is better to exist than to not exist

Therefore, God exists

Descartes' form is similar:

God is a being with all possible perfections

Existence is a [[predicate]] of such a being

Therefore, God exists

Its deceptively simple appearance often causes confusion and a 'mental double-take' when it is first presented. It has the advantage that even [[atheists]] tend to agree with the first premise defining God, and from that follows in a strong, apprantly deductive fashion. Anselm also attempted to bypass [[Hume's Fork]], stating that 'God exists' is a unique type of statement, as it is analytically derived, yet states something about the physical world. He called this an 'analytic existensial' statement. The claim of a 'unique' statement exempt from the laws of reasoning often causes concern about the validity of any argument including it- see also [[Tillich]]'s [[symbolism]].

Even in Anselm's day, however, problems were identified with the ontological argument. [[Guanilo]], a contemporary of Anselm, used [[reductio ad absurdum]] and envisaged a 'lost, yet most perfect island'. Guanilo argued that just because we can imagine this island does not mean it actually exists.

[[Kant]] weighed in against Decartes' version, challenging the second premise that existence is a predicate. Kant said he could imagine a hundred thalers (coins) in such great detail that whether or not they actually existed was arbitrary, as there was no difference other than this between the imagined and the existent thalers.

Finally, [[Davies]] identified the critical failing of the argument. As presented, the argument [[begs the question]]- it assumes what it sets out to prove. Ie, if a God existed, he would be supremely perfect, and would therefore exist. In explicit form, the first premise correctly reads 'The concept of God is the most supremely perfect concept'. The ontological argument is therefore [[flawed]] in that it uses [[equivocation]] to progress from a [[concept of God]] to an existent of God to an existent God, and [[fatally flawed]] in that the entire argument collapses irreparably once this is exposed.

[[Category: Arguments for the existence of God]]

Anselm of Canterbury

2007-03-27T23:42:05Z

Mark444: Preparing to create 'ontological argument' now- taking info to new page. Corrected modern law claims, clarified argument logic (ironic for an Anselm article! :)), replaced bias with facts, cleaned

Saint Anselm (1033-1109), born in northern [[Italy]], was an early intellectual giant of [[scholasticism]]. The period from the late 1000s to about 1300 is known as the "High Middle Ages," partly due to this intellectual activity and also due to great population growth.

Scholasticism strengthened understanding of Christian doctrine through careful definition and systematic argument. St. Anselm preferred to defend [[Christianity]] through use of strong logical arguments, rather than relying solely on scripture. St. Anselm is famous for the first formal presentation of the [[ontological argument]], which is a [[fundamentally flawed]] argument attempting to prove the existence of [[God]] by arguing from its definition.

St. Anselm was a [[Latin]] scholar who became a [[Benedictine]] monk, much to the disappointment of his father, who wanted him to enter politics. In this way his early life is remarkably similar to that of [[Aquinas]]. However, the two severely disagreed on the best method for proving God's existence. Aquinas found Anselm's ontological argument flawed and cold, while Anselm found Aquinas' [[cosmological argument]]s and [[teleological argument]]s weak and unconvincing.

St. Anselm also presented an argument for why [[Jesus Christ]] must have existed. Under the [[feudalism|feudal]] system of Anselm’s day, the severity of a crime and amount of satisfaction required of the offender varied depending on the status of the victim. Someone who committed a crime against the king would deserve a far more severe punishment than someone who committed a crime against a peasant. St. Anselm wrote a paper entitled "[[Cur Deus homo]]?" ("Why Did God Become Man?"), in which he argued that 'finite' man could never satisfy a crime or sin against the 'infinite' [[God]]. Only an 'infinite' man could provide full satisfaction because the victim of the crime or sin was the 'infinite' [[God]]. Hence, assuming the universal validity of feudal system, and assuming the existence of an ontological system to enforce this feudal system on Man, an 'infinite' man is essential. Anselm argued that this man was [[Jesus Christ]].

St. Anselm was appointed the [[Archbishop of Canterbury]], [[England]], which he accepted reluctantly. He became determined to reform the English [[Catholic Church]] and he fought against efforts by the King of [[England]] to control or interfere with the Church. At one point Anselm presented his grievances against [[William II|King William]] to [[Pope Urban II]]. These conflicts were precursors to a huge dispute between a pope and English king centuries later, which caused the king to form his own church and split from Roman authority.

Fatally flawed

2007-03-27T22:51:05Z

Mark444: New page: A fatally flawed argument is one from which nothing can be salvaged. Given that all arguments seek to establish something, an argument which is fatally flawed has such critical [[problems]...

A fatally flawed argument is one from which nothing can be salvaged. Given that all arguments seek to establish something, an argument which is fatally flawed has such critical [[problems]] with its structure, premises, [[reasoning]], or any combination of these that it is simply [[impossible]] to rework the argument to be [[effective]]. This can be contrasted with [[flawed]] arguments, which require structural reworking, and [[unsound]] arguments, which are based on incorrect [[premise|premises]].

A classic example of a fatally flawed argument is the [[ontological argument]]. Due to [[equivocation]] between an [[existent]] [[God]] and a [[conceptual]] God, the argument is flawed. However, due to its [[syllogism|syllogistic]] and [[analytic]], strong [[deductive]] nature, it is impossible to represent the anything recognisable as the ontological argument in a new form, and the flaw is fatal.

Humes fork

2007-03-27T22:44:58Z

Mark444: Redirecting to Hume's fork

#REDIRECT [[Hume's fork]]

Hume's fork

2007-03-27T22:44:16Z

Mark444: New page: Hume's Fork is an ontological principle which states that all statements fall into one of two discrete categories. Statements can either be analytic or synthetic. Note ...

Hume's Fork is an [[ontological principle]] which states that all statements fall into one of two [[discrete]] [[categories]]. Statements can either be [[analytic]] or [[synthetic]]. Note that this says nothing about the [[truth]] value of the statements, although [[bivalence]] is assumed.

Analytic statements are based on [[a priori]] knowledge, are necessarily and definitively true or false, and true or false by [[definition]]. Their [[truth]] or [[falsehood]] is often, but not always, obvious. All [[tautology|tautologous]] ('all hamburgers are hamburgers'), [[axiom|axiomatic]] ('this triangle has 6 sides'), [[math|mathematical]] ('2+2=5'), or [[predicate]]-contained ('all bachelors are unmarried') statements are analytic. Analytic reasoning uses [[deductive logic]].

Synthetic statements are based on [[a posteriori]] knowledge in the physical world, are likely to be true or false based on the strength of their supporting arguments. Scientific ('at sea level and under normal atmospheric pressure, pure water boils at 100 degrees centigrade'), physical ('the sun will rise tomorrow'), existensial ('God exists'), and most day-to-day ('my car is red') statements are synthetic. Synthetic reasoning uses [[inductive logic]].

Many [[arguments for the existence of God]] and [[arguments against the existence of God]] are based on synthetic statements and inductive reasoning. A notable exception to this is the [[ontological argument]], which is wholly analytic.

[[Category: Ontological Principles]]

Occam's razor

2007-03-27T22:42:10Z

Mark444: That's not a *fundamental* assumption

Humes guillotine

2007-03-27T22:40:55Z

Mark444: Redirecting to Naturalistic fallacy

#REDIRECT [[Naturalistic fallacy]]

Hume's Guillotine

2007-03-27T22:40:25Z

Mark444: Redirecting to Naturalistic fallacy

#REDIRECT [[Naturalistic fallacy]]

David Hume

2007-03-27T22:39:08Z

Mark444: Added links, added Hume's work on ontological principles, rephrased slightly

David Hume (1711-1776) was a Scottish philosopher and historian who promoted [[materialism]] and [[naturalism]] over [[spirituality]]. He was [[skeptical]] towards [[religion]], and his major philosophical works include ''A Treatise on Human Nature'', ''An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals'', and ''Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion''. He also published the wide-ranging ''History of England'', which covered the history of [[Great Britain]] from the time of [[Julius Caesar]] to 1688. Many of his quotes have survived to this day, including "You can tell what is inside a person's soul by what comes out if it."

Hume is considered by some to be one of the greatest English philosophers, particularly noting his elegant prose style and the ease of reading of his material. Hume has been criticized by many for his atheistic approach, and [[Charles Darwin]] declared Hume to have been his central influence, as did "Darwin's bulldog," [[Thomas Henry Huxley]]. {{citeneeded}}

Hume was one of the first philosophers to rigorously study [[ontological principles]]- vital tools of logical reasoning that are commonly used in maths, systemology, philosophy, and theology. He helped develop many of the common logical devices, most notably, [[Hume's Guillotine]] and [[Hume's Fork]] are named in honor of him.

Naturalistic fallacy

2007-03-27T22:32:08Z

Mark444: New page: The Naturalistic Fallacy is an ontological principle which states that 'it is impossible to derive an ought from an is'. In more general terms, it is impossible to logically progress f...

The Naturalistic Fallacy is an [[ontological principle]] which states that 'it is impossible to derive an ought from an is'. In more general terms, it is impossible to logically progress from an observation of the physical world to a [[normative ethics|normative ethical]] system or make moral statements.

It was very roughly proposed by [[Hume]], and is also known as 'Hume's Guillotine', but later expanded on in much greater detail by Moore. He observed that all moral statemnets, most clearly [[psuedo-syllogisms]], progress using flawed [[implicit logic]]. Take, for instance, the following common argument against [[abortion]]:

Abortion is the murder of an innocent foetus.

Therefore, abortion is wrong.

Moore successfully argued that this argument misses a vital step of reasoning, and should read:

Abortion is the murder of an innocent foetus.

Murder of innocents is wrong.

Therefore, abortion is wrong.

He then went on to argue that there is no way of logically showing the premise that the [[murder]] of [[innocents]] is '[[wrong]]'- there is no logical argument which can be made to show this is true or false. Moore, however, was not arguing that ethics is [[fatally flawed]], but argued that this was a problem that affected most [[normative ethical systems]] and needed to be addressed.

[[Category: Ontological Principles]]

Occam's razor

2007-03-27T22:28:29Z

Mark444:

Ockham's Razor is one of the most widely used [[ontological principle|ontological principles]] in all fields of applied logic, most notably [[philosophy]], [[theology]], and [[systemology]]. It can be stated as follows:

'From any set of equally probable explanations, we should assume the one which makes the least [[fundamental assumptions]] is correct, until we have reason to believe otherwise'

This is different from the shortest explanation, the shortest logical argument, and the simplest explanation, and the razor is often incorrectly quoted and/or applied. Some people have argued that these criteria qualify as better principles than the razor.

Occam's razor can be illustrated be the following common example. A tree is found uprooted in the middle of a field with no apparent cause. Two people offer competing hypotheses for how this occured. Person A says that there must have been a storm last night, which combined with heavy rainfall the previous day, resulted in the uprooting of the tree. Person B says that last night aliens visited the planet Earth, and uprooted the tree as a message to mankind. There is no way of determining which of these hypotheses is correct after the fact, but as A's hypothesis makes far fewer fundamental assumptions (basically that the planet Earth has weather) than B's hypothesis (basically that aliens exist, have a way of finding humans in the cosmos, have a way of traversing space to reach our planet, could topple such a tree without being noticed, and so forth), we should assume A is correct and that a storm felled the tree unless B can provide some other evidense to support their claim.

[[John Wisdom]] and [[Anthony Flew]] indirectly use the razor in [[The Parable of the Gardener]].

Among its practical applications, Occam's Razor has been used by both sides in the debate between theism and atheism, correctly by the atheists. Let us take for an example the origin of intelligent life on Earth. The development of intelligent life can be explained very well by Charles Darwin's theory of evolution via natural selection. However, many theists postulate God as another transcendental cause. Advocates of the Anthropic Principle might contend that evolution is the means through which God works. However, Occam's Razor allows us to eliminate God from the hypothesis, since the idea is an unnecessary assumption. The 'simpler' explanation (that which makes fewer fundamental assumptions) is that God had nothing to do with the development of Intelligent Life and that it came about as a result of natural processes. Therefore, the latter explanation is the most reasonable to believe.

<ref>http://skepdic.com/occam.html</ref>

[[Category:Ontological Principles]]

Category:Ontological Principles

2007-03-27T22:27:03Z

Mark444: New page: This is a list of ontological principles commonly used in analytic philosophy and logic.

This is a list of ontological principles commonly used in [[analytic philosophy]] and [[logic]].

Occam's Razor

2007-03-27T22:21:29Z

Mark444: Merged this page into a pre-existing one, added redirects, etc

#REDIRECT [[Occam's razor]]

Occam's razor

2007-03-27T22:20:30Z

Mark444: About to merge the two occam's razor pages to here. Horse eg is flawed as the phenomena can be empirically verified- the razor is not being employed after the fact. Feel free to do a better eg though

Ockham's Razor is one of the most widely used [[ontological principle|ontological principles]] in all fields of applied logic, most notably [[philosophy]], [[theology]], and [[systemology]]. It can be stated as follows:

'From any set of equally probable explanations, we should assume the one which makes the least [[fundamental assumptions]] is correct, until we have reason to believe otherwise'

This is different from the shortest explanation, the shortest logical argument, and the simplest explanation, and the razor is often incorrectly quoted and/or applied. Some people have argued that these criteria qualify as better principles than the razor.

Occam's razor can be illustrated be the following common example. A tree is found uprooted in the middle of a field with no apparent cause. Two people offer competing hypotheses for how this occured. Person A says that there must have been a storm last night, which combined with heavy rainfall the previous day, resulted in the uprooting of the tree. Person B says that last night aliens visited the planet Earth, and uprooted the tree as a message to mankind. There is no way of determining which of these hypotheses is correct after the fact, but as A's hypothesis makes far fewer fundamental assumptions (basically that the planet Earth has weather) than B's hypothesis (basically that aliens exist, have a way of finding humans in the cosmos, have a way of traversing space to reach our planet, could topple such a tree without being noticed, and so forth), we should assume A is correct and that a storm felled the tree unless B can provide some other evidense to support their claim.

[[John Wisdom]] and [[Anthony Flew]] indirectly use the razor in [[The Parable of the Gardener]].

Among its practical applications, Occam's Razor has been used by both sides in the debate between theism and atheism, correctly by the atheists. Let us take for an example the origin of intelligent life on Earth. The development of intelligent life can be explained very well by Charles Darwin's theory of evolution via natural selection. However, many theists postulate God as another transcendental cause. Advocates of the Anthropic Principle might contend that evolution is the means through which God works. However, Occam's Razor allows us to eliminate God from the hypothesis, since the idea is an unnecessary assumption. The 'simpler' explanation (that which makes fewer fundamental assumptions) is that God had nothing to do with the development of Intelligent Life and that it came about as a result of natural processes. Therefore, the latter explanation is the most reasonable to believe.

<ref>http://skepdic.com/occam.html</ref>

Ockhams razor

2007-03-27T22:15:44Z

Mark444: Redirecting to Ockham's Razor

#REDIRECT [[Ockham's Razor]]

Natural science

2007-03-27T22:11:59Z

Mark444: Working on merging the two OR pages

Science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge based on the [[scientific method]], as well as to the organized body of knowledge gained through such research.

Science is based on the ontological position of [[Empiricism]], which states that knowledge must be based upon observable phenomena that are both testable (their validity can be falsified) and repeatable (another researcher, working under the same conditions, can produce a similar result). Science is not to be confused with [[Materialism]], the view that the material realm is all that exists. As a rule, science does not discount the existence of non-observable phenomena, however since theories concerned with such matters are not falsifiable they are not amenable to empirical investigation, and are therefore not topics that science addresses.

Our understanding of the universe has been increasing [[exponentially]] since Mankind discovered [[agriculture]] 5000 years ago, accelerating yet further with the notable developments of [[Scientific Method]]- the system of [[hypothesis]], [[experiment]], and [[refinement]] that must be used to meet strict peer-review procedures used today, and increasing [[computer]] power over the last 50 years.

The essential elements of a scientific method are iterations, recursions, interleavings, and orderings of the following:
-Characterizations (Quantifications, observations, and measurements)
-Hypotheses (theoretical, hypothetical explanations of observations and measurements)
-Predictions (reasoning including logical deduction from hypothesis and theory)
-Experiments (tests of all of the above)

Most scientific discoveries appear to be in conflict with a [[literal]] interpretation of many [[holy books]], including the [[Bible]]. However, science and empiricism make no claims about the nature of any potential [[supernatural]], [[immaterial]] realm, as these are impossible to assess empirically. Many scientists use philosophical tools such as [[Occam's razor]] and point to phenomena such as [[The God of the Gaps]] to argue for an implicit rejection of untestable hypotheses.

==Kansas controversy==
The definition of science caused a heated controversy in Kansas that drew nationwide attention. <ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/15/science/sciencespecial2/15evol.html?ex=1289710800&en=8222cfc9c70fd951&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss</ref> Here are the definitions that were at issue for use by the state schools.

:'''Before 2004''': Science is the human activity of seeking natural explanations for what we observe in the world around us.

:'''2005''': Science is a systematic method of continuing investigation that uses observations, hypothesis testing, measurement, experimentation, logical argument and theory building to lead to more adequate explanations of natural phenomena. Science does so while maintaining strict empirical standards and healthy skepticism. Scientific explanations are built on observations, hypotheses, and theories. A hypothesis is a testable statement about the natural world that can be used to build more complex inferences and explanations. A theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate observations, inferences, and tested hypotheses.

:'''2007''': Science is a human activity of systematically seeking natural explanations for what we observe in the world around us. Throughout history people from many cultures have used the methods of science to contribute to scientific knowledge and technological innovations, making science a worldwide enterprise. Scientists test explanations against the natural world, logically integrating observations and tested hypotheses with accepted explanations to gradually build more reliable and accurate understandings of nature. Scientific explanations must be testable and repeatable, and findings must be confirmed through additional observation and experimentation. As it is practiced in the late 20th and early 21st century, science is restricted to explaining only the natural world, using only natural cause. This is because science currently has no tools to test explanations using non-natural (such as supernatural) causes.

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Science| ]]

Principle of Proportionality

2007-03-26T17:08:25Z

Mark444: I've tried to keep this neutral but Hume was an atheistic scholar. Can we get a category of ontological principles too please?

Radiocarbon dating

2007-03-26T16:43:47Z

Mark444: I'm sure we don't have to resort to enormous lies of omission with regards to scientific theories

Radiocarbon dating is a method for estimating the age of organic material by measuring the ratio of carbon-14 to carbon-12 present. This technique is based on the measured concentration of carbon-14 in the atmosphere, assuming relative stability, and uses the [[half-life]] of carbon-14, which is 5730 ± 40 years, however a global standard half-life of 5568 ± 30 years is often employed.

Due to atmospheric disturbances over the history of the earth, the natural level and distribution of carbon-14 varies over time. For example, extremely recently in the earth's history, testing of [[nuclear bomb|nuclear weapons]] in the atmosphere has increased the concentration of carbon-14 in the Northern Hemisphere. To account for this, standard calibration curves are used to take account of chronological fluctuations, and results can be obtained which are rarely more than 700 years out.

Other isotopes with longer half-lives can also be used to date objects- however, each method has its own drawbacks. For instance, the decay of potassium-40 is often used to complement the carbon-14 dating of [[dinosaur]] [[fossils]].

Substance dualism

2007-03-25T15:37:33Z

Mark444: Tried to do this as a summary page, but most of this probably belongs on theory sub pages. If anyone can think of a better replacement for 'stuff', feel free to swap it out

Substance dualism is the belief that [[reality]] is composed of two fundamentally different types of 'stuff'- [[material]] 'stuff', and [[immaterial]] 'stuff'. [[Science]] is concerned only with the study of material 'stuff', whereas [[theology]] and [[mysticism]] lays claim to a study of any immaterial 'stuff'.

Substance dualism was at the core of [[Plato]]'s [[philosophy]]. He argued that the constantly changing, imperfect material world was merely an shadowy reflection of the immutable, perfect immaterial realm of the Forms. This immaterial realm could only be accessed by [[human]] reason.

[[Descartes]] also advanced a specific form of substance dualism known as [[Cartesian Dualism]]. He argued that there was only one thing which was immaterial- the human [[mind]]. When a person has a thought, such as 'I am hungry', it results in the immaterial mind affecting the [[brain]]'s [[pineal gland]] in such a way that the brain sends electronic signals to simulate various muscles to contract so the body eats. This in turn results in changes in the pineal gland, which make the mind feel less hungry and sated.

However, in the [[1960s]], [[Ryle]] famously argued that substance dualism, particularly cartesian dualism, was nothing more than '[[the ghost in the machine]]'- a bizarre, ineffectual, unnecessary force that contributed nothing to our understanding. He argued that concepts such as the [[soul]]- long held as the classic example of an immaterial thing- result from a specific misuse of language called a [[category mistake]]. He further argued that, if there was an immaterial realm, either it would have to be wholly separate from our own material realm (leading to theories of [[non-interactionism]] such as [[epiphenomenalism]] and [[parallelism]]) or that [[God]] is deliberatly deceiving our senses whenever such [[interaction]] occurs, as there is no [[empirical]] [[evidence]] of dualist interaction in the material world.

This has led many modern theologians, such as [[Hick]], to abandon the [[ontological]] position of substance dualism in favour of [[materialism]]. This, however, theoretically renders religious [[hypotheses]], such as Hick's [[replica theory]], scientifically testable, and it remains to be seen what results this avenue of thought will produce in the future.

User:Mark444

2007-03-15T19:08:42Z

Mark444:

Hi there everyone :)! I have followed the Will of the Lord all my life, and believe in the absolute truth of the Bible. Liberal interpretations lead only to unease and doubt, while faith in the Holy Spirit and God brings absolute truth and certainty. I am unused to the style and demands of encyclopedia editing, so please excuse me if I offend... I'm enthusiastic and willing to learn though :) So please feel free to correct me! I am an experienced theologian, apologetic, scientist, and analytic philosopher, and am hoping to bring my knowledge in these areas to the site. I believe it is wrong to misrepresent the positions held by others, such as atheism and empiricism, and am currently endeavouring to improve some of the more questionable articles in these areas.

Occam's razor

2007-03-15T18:57:58Z

Mark444:

Ockham's Razor is one of the most widely used [[ontological principle|ontological principles]] in all fields of applied logic, most notably [[philosophy]], [[theology]], and [[systemology]]. It can be stated as follows:

'From any set of equally probable explanations, we should assume the one which makes the least [[fundamental assumptions]] is correct, until we have reason to believe otherwise'

This can be illustrated be the following common example. A tree is found uprooted in the middle of a field with no apparent cause. Two people offer competing hypotheses for how this occured. Person A says that there must have been a storm last night, which combined with heavy rainfall the previous day, resulted in the uprooting of the tree. Person B says that last night aliens visited the planet Earth, and uprooted the tree as a message to mankind. There is no way of determining which of these hypotheses is correct after the fact, but as A's hypothesis makes far fewer fundamental assumptions (basically that the planet Earth has weather) than B's hypothesis (basically that aliens exist, have a way of finding humans in the cosmos, have a way of traversing space to reach our planet, could topple such a tree without being noticed, and so forth), we should assume A is correct and that a storm felled the tree unless B can provide some other evidense to support their claim.

[[John Wisdom]] and [[Anthony Flew]] indirectly use the razor in [[The Parable of the Gardener]].

Natural science

2007-03-15T18:39:07Z

Mark444:

A branch of study dedicated to the accumulation and classification of observable facts in order to formulate general laws about the natural world.<ref>Wile, Dr. Jay L. ''Exploring Creation With General Science''. Anderson: Apologia Educational Ministries, Inc 2000</ref> Science is based on the ontological position of [[empiricism]]- that the material realm is all that exists, that it exists [[mind-independently]], and that our senses can be trusted to perceive the material realm with reasonable and calculable accuracy. Our understanding of the universe has been increasing [[exponentially]] since Mankind discovered [[agriculture]] 5000 years ago, accellerating yet further with the notable developments of [[Scientific Method]]- the system of [[hypothesis]], [[experiment]], and [[refinement]] that must be used to meet strict peer-review procedures used today, and increasing [[computer]] power over the last 50 years.

Recent scientific discoveries appear to be in conflict with a [[literal]] interpretation of many [[holy books]], including the [[Bibble]]. However, science and empiricism make no claims about the nature of any potential [[supernatural]], [[immaterial]] realm, as these are impossible to assess empirically. Many scientists use philosophical tools such as [[Ockham's Razor]] and point to phenomena such as [[The God of the Gaps]] to argue for an implicit rejection of untestable hypotheses.

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Science]]

Natural science

2007-03-15T18:38:59Z

Mark444:

A branch of study dedicated to the accumulation and classification of observable facts in order to formulate general laws about the natural world.<ref>Wile, Dr. Jay L. ''Exploring Creation With General Science''. Anderson: Apologia Educational Ministries, Inc 2000</ref> Science is based on the ontological position of [[empiricism]]- that the material realm is all that exists, that it exists [[mind-independently]], and that our senses can be trusted to perceive the material realm with reasonable and calculable accuracy. Our understanding of the universe has been increasing [[exponentially]] since Mankind discovered [[agriculture]] 5000 years ago, accellerating yet further with the notable developments of [[Scientific Method]]- the system of [[hypothesis]], [[experiment]], and [[refinement]] that must be used to meet strict peer-review procedures used today, and increasing [[computer] power over the last 50 years.

Recent scientific discoveries appear to be in conflict with a [[literal]] interpretation of many [[holy books]], including the [[Bibble]]. However, science and empiricism make no claims about the nature of any potential [[supernatural]], [[immaterial]] realm, as these are impossible to assess empirically. Many scientists use philosophical tools such as [[Ockham's Razor]] and point to phenomena such as [[The God of the Gaps]] to argue for an implicit rejection of untestable hypotheses.

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Science]]

Natural science

2007-03-15T18:36:33Z

Mark444: I realise this is a touchy issue, so I just added some more general information

A branch of study dedicated to the accumulation and classification of observable facts in order to formulate general laws about the natural world.<ref>Wile, Dr. Jay L. ''Exploring Creation With General Science''. Anderson: Apologia Educational Ministries, Inc. Science is based on the ontological position of [[empiricism]]- that the material realm is all that exists, that it exists [[mind-independently]], and that our senses can be trusted to perceive the material realm with reasonable and calculable accuracy. Our understanding of the universe has been increasing [[exponentially]] since Mankind discovered [[agriculture]] 5000 years ago, accellerating yet further with the notable developments of [[Scientific Method]]- the system of [[hypothesis]], [[experiment]], and [[refinement]] that must be used to meet strict peer-review procedures used today, and increasing [[computer] power over the last 50 years.

Recent scientific discoveries appear to be in conflict with a [[literal]] interpretation of many [[holy books]], including the [[Bibble]]. However, science and empiricism make no claims about the nature of any potential [[supernatural]], [[immaterial]] realm, as these are impossible to assess empirically. Many scientists use philosophical tools such as [[Ockham's Razor]] and point to phenomena such as [[The God of the Gaps]] to argue for an implicit rejection of untestable hypotheses.

2000</ref>

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Science]]

Aristotle

2007-03-15T18:23:59Z

Mark444: *Everyone* in ancient Greece supported slavery & homosexuality- this belongs in a seperate page. Saying Aristotle wasn't thought to be involved in Plato's death implies he was, which is absurd

[[Image:Aristotle.gif|thumb|150px|Aristotle]]
Aristotle lived from 384 to 322 BC. He was a [[Greek philosopher]] who was a student of [[Plato]] and the tutor of [[Alexander the Great]]. Aristotle emphasized reason and observation of the natural world, and he is believed by many to be the greatest [[philosopher]] of all [[time]] and the founder of [[empiricism]], the ontological grounding of [[science]].

Aristotle came to the [[Academy]] when he was seventeen and stayed there for twenty years until the death of [[Plato]]. Aristotle’s approach was in stark contrast to Plato's. Whereas Plato thought all true [[knowledge]] could be obtained [[a priori]]- a [[disembodied]] [[mind]] floating in a featureless void with no sense [[experience]] could work out everything there is to know- Aristotle thought that the natural world needed to be studied and observed for knowledge to be gained. He embarked on the massive task of observing and compiling as much information as possible on everything he could study at the time. In contrast to Plato’s interest in physics and maths, Aristotle was fascinated by biology, and classified over 500 animal species. He ultimately founded his own school, the Lyceum, and equipped it with specimens, libraries, maps and other accoutrements found in modern [[university]].

Aristotle also formulated [[Virtue Ethics]], a code of living which emphasises what sort of person we want to be when making a decision, rather than, as tends to be the focus in modern ethical thinking, the motives or the consequences of actions. When Aristotle's teachings were brought back to Europe at the end of the [[Dark Ages]] by [[Arab]] [[merchants]], [[Aquinas]], eager to reconcile Catholicism with Aristotle's secular empiricism, developed [[Natural Law Theory]].

Aristotle was not a [[theist]] and, like [[Plato]] and [[Socrates]], rejected the existence of the [[Old Gods]] many Athenians worshipped. However, he recognised the impossibility of an [[infinite regress]] of cause and effect in the natural world, and so postulated The [[Unmoved Mover]] as a [[First Cause]] of the natural world. This arguably makes Aristotle the first recorded [[deism|deist]], however his Unmoved Mover also found some employ in his understanding of the [[purpose]] or 'teleos' of natural objects.

[[Category:Biographies]]
[[Category:Philosophy]]

Plato

2007-03-15T18:09:23Z

Mark444: Corrected some common AotC misconceptions, added Plato's pre-Christian work

Plato was a great [[Greek philosopher]] from 428 to 347 BC. He was a student of [[Socrates]] and founded the Academy, a school bereft of buildings wherein Plato taught his students math, logic, and the tenants of Sophitic thought. He wrote the [[Republic]], and its logical sequel, [[The Laws]], as well as a large number of other, less popular works in which he showed (amongst other things) how to teach [[geometry]] to [[slaves]], how to irritate [[sophists]], and how everything in the world is made of triangles. One of Plato's pupils was [[Aristotle]], who went on to greatly influence Aquinas, and much of the [[Magesterium]] of the [[Roman Catholic Church]]. Although Plato cannot be described as a theist, he was a major influence on early Christian teachings, and there is notably similarity between his philosophy- [[The Form of the Good]], the [[soul]], and so on, and the most fundamental theistic beliefs.

Plato also created the allegory of the cave. In this story there are a group of individuals chained in a cave with a fire to their backs. They cannot turn their heads and may only gaze upon the shadows reflecting off the cave walls. The prisoners establish a primitive social order in which respect is granted to those who can correctly predict which (completly random) shape will next be projected onto the wall. One day someone escapes and, after a long and ardous struggle symbolising how difficult and uncomfortable it can be for Man to practice philosophy and profoundly reconsider the world around him, observes the real world. He returns to tell his companions of his amazing discovery only to be refuted and disbelieved by the cave dwellers, who cannot even comprehend what he is trying to tell them, and prefer to play their shadow games. Further hurting his credibility, having been in the light he finds it difficult to operate in the dim cave and appears clumsy, and completly unable to perceive the shadows- he has no social status and is ostracised as a literal 'outsider'. In this Plato illustrates the futility of shallow living and paying heed to traditional and social convention, and shows that Man must strive out on his own to gain true knowledge.

[[Category:Biographies]]
[[Category:Philosophy]]

Islam

2007-03-14T23:28:01Z

Mark444: I've done some general tidying here... monotheism can't be 'complete' or not, it's a discrete belief, corrected some spelled, added Biblical quotes

'''Islam''' is [[monotheism|monotheistic]] religion of Abraham based on the teachings of [[Muhammad]]. Islam has grown to be the second largest and fastest growing religion in the world, with over 1.4 billion followers. The word "Islam" means "submission", to God. The followers of Islam are called [[Muslim|Muslims]] or, less commonly, Moslems. Muslims practice monotheism, worshipping a god called [[Allah]] and believing Muhammad to be his last and greatest prophet. Muslims live by the Qu'ran, which they consider to be the pure and holy word of Allah. Muslims wash their hands before reading the book, which is considered complete and perfect only in the original Arabic, and burn old copies instead of throwing them away. Muslims follow the five pillars of Islam.

[[Image:Mecca.jpg|thumb|right|300px|Mecca, the holy city of the Muslim's]]

===Five Pillars of Islam===

*'''Shahadah (Profession of Faith)''' -The Shahadah is the Muslim profession of faith. The English translation is "''There is none worthy of worship except the God, and [[Muhammad]] is the messenger of God''"

*'''Salat (Ritual Prayer)''' -All Muslims are required to Pray to Allah five times each day while facing [[Mecca]].

*'''Zakat (Charity)''' Able Muslims must donate to the poor based on the wealth one has accumulated. In current usage it is interpreted as 2.5% of the value of most valuables and savings held for a full [[lunar year]].

*'''Sawm (Fasting)''' All able-bodied Muslims (children, the elderly, and the ill are exempt) must fast during daylight hours during the entire month of [[Ramadan]]. According to Muslims, this purifies the body and soul.

*'''Hajj (Pilgrimage)''' All able-bodied Muslims must make a pilgrimage to Mecca at least once in their lives.

[[Image:Quran.jpg|thumb|left|250px|Pages from the Koran, the holy book of the Islamic religion.]]

==Islam and Christianity==

While Muslims do not believe Jesus to be the Son of God or that he was crucified, they consider him to be one of God's most important prophets. However, the Qu'ran warns against worshipping Jesus, for fear of [[idolatry]].<ref>[http://www.ccg.org/_domain/ccg.org/Islam/Islam.htm Christian Churches of God Articles on Islam], March 10, 2007</ref>

The Qur'an states that Christians will burn in Hell: “Unbelievers are those that say: ‘God is the Messiah, the son of Mary.’ He that worships
other deities besides God, God will deny paradise, and the Fire shall be his home. None shallhelp the evil-doers.
Unbelievers are those that say: ‘God is one of three.’ There is but one God. If they do not
desist from saying so, they shall be sternly punished.” (5:71-73)

Christians, on the other hand, believe that Muslim practices violate the first commandment, for which the traditional punishment is death by stoning:

"Thou shalt have none other gods before me." (Deuteronomy 5:7)

==Islam and Paganism==

Although most Muslims profess belief in a single, almighty [[Allah|God]], a substantial minority of accredited Western scholars believe that some Muslim beliefs, like those of the early [[Roman Catholic Church]], system can be traced back to distinctly polytheistic antecedents. Some, for example, have attempted to link Allah to a moon deity, though Allah is cited in the Koran as the God of Abraham and Isaac (Judaism and Christianity). <ref>Abramahov, "Islamic Theology". Edinburgh University Press: Edinburgh, 1988. [http://www.amazon.com/Islamic-Theology-Binyamin-Abrahamov/dp/0748611029/sr=8-4/qid=1172042917/ref=pd_bbs_sr_4/105-1837174-2630046?ie=UTF8&s=books]</ref> Others have pointed to the pagan roots of various Muslim prohibitions, such as the ban on pork (also practiced in Orthodox Judaism) originating in the 3rd-century AD Damascene [[cult]] of the [[pig-god]] [[Jamal]]. <ref>Ibid.</ref> There is some evidence that traditional Muslim scholars have been suppressing this information as well as various recently-recovered scrolls that hint at early Muslim human sacrifice, which was also a part of early Judaism which ended after the Genisis story of Abraham and Isaac (e.g., at Uhud). <ref>Esposito, "The Oxford History of Islam", p. 523. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 1999. [http://www.amazon.com/Oxford-History-Islam-John-Esposito/dp/0195107993/sr=8-1/qid=1172042853/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/105-1837174-2630046?ie=UTF8&s=books]</ref> Like all major religions, Christianity included, Islam has ill-understood and fascinating roots that modern scholarship has yet to fully plumb.

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Religion]]

Amnesty International

2007-03-14T23:19:39Z

Mark444:

{{stub}}
As stated by their homepage: "Amnesty International (AI) is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights." It is a non-profit organization that speaks out against human rights abuses, demands the release of political prisoners, and opposes the death penalty. Despite claiming to be wholly independant from religious views, their symbol of a candle shining out through barbed wire draws on Christian symbolism, and all their stated missions overlap with general Christian ideals.
<br>
[http://www.amnesty.org/ Amnesty International's homepage]

Aesop

2007-03-14T23:13:37Z

Mark444: I felt it was necessery to add this... no one knows what Aesop looks like, or even if he existed at all

600's B.C., [[Greece|Greek]] slave and author of self-titled Aesop's Fables- a collection of short stories each containing a simple moral message. Some historians doubt Aesop's existence, as there is no objective collection of his works. As such, the picture below is an artist's interpretation.

[[Image:aesop.jpg]]

Holy Grail

2007-03-14T23:10:58Z

Mark444:

The Holy Grail was believed to be the cup that Jesus used in the Last Supper to present the wine used to represent the new covenent in his blood. Legends claim that the Grail was a golden goblet similar to the holy vessels for the drink offerings in the temple, that the Grail was protected by the Templar Knights and that the Grail was eventually hidden on the island of Avalon.

The Holy Grail has inspired authors and directors for centuries, notably [[Dan Brown]] for his book [[The Da Vinci Code]] and [[Stephen Spielberg]] for his film [[Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade]].

{{stub}}

Equal Rights Amendment

2007-03-14T23:08:22Z

Mark444: I don't see how it follows from this legislation that taxpayers would be forced to support abortion

The so-called Equal Rights Amendment was an amendment to the [[United States Constitution | United States Constitution]] passed by Congress in 1972 and sent to the states for ratification within a deadline of seven years. The amendment, which was untitled, stated:

SECTION 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of [[sex | sex]].

SEC. 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

SEC. 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

The purpose and effect of the Amendment would be to prohibit any legal distinctions between men and women, and boys and girls. An all-male draft or male-only combat regimens would presumably become illegal. Same-sex marriage would presumably become legal. Equal representation of boys and girls on sports teams, and perhaps even the termination of all-boys or all-girls sports teams or publicly funded schools, could be required. Any legal distinction you can imagine between males and females would be banned.

35 out of 38 states passed this amendment, but opposition led by Phyllis Schlafly then defeated it. Congress then extended the deadline to 1982 in legislation that a court later invalidated, but no more states passed the amendment in the additional three years anyway. Several states rescinded their prior passage of the amendment.

Feminism

2007-03-14T23:04:58Z

Mark444:

Feminism is the philosophy that [[women]] deserve to have rights equal to those of men. Most feminist writing today concerns issues like [[abortion]], [[domestic violence]], [[rape]], [[maternity leave]], [[gay rights|lesbian rights]], [[child custody]], and [[comparable worth]].

The [[Bible]] says, "In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety." -- I Tim. 2:9-15

Not all women are Feminists. One example is [[Phyllis Schlafly]], who opposed the [[Equal Rights Amendment]] in the [[1960s]].

Internet

2007-03-14T22:52:20Z

Mark444:

{{stub}}

The Internet is a global network of interconnected smaller computer networks. Data is transmitted in small packets using the Internet Protocol (IP) where are then reassembled. The Internet has many positive uses, but is often used for the transmission and sharing of [[pornography]], something which many countries have sought to formulate [[legislation]] to prevent. Recently many pro-Christian and pro-Conservative personal websites have appeared, showing the increasing spread of both these views.

Natural law theory

2007-03-14T22:43:09Z

Mark444:

Natural Law Theory is the official ethic of the roman catholic church. It was espoused by Thomas Aquinas, and argues that, as God created the universe and revealed his mind to Man through the Bible, Man can use his reason to discern God's Will by studying the natural world. For instance, a study of the male and female reproductive system naturally leads any sane person to see that their natural function is to come together for the sole purpose of procreation- so any acts other than this purpose, such as homosexuality and autosexuality, are wrong.

User:Mark444

2007-03-14T22:29:35Z

Mark444: