I fail to see any connection between that statement and a "materialist/consumerist culture". Prior to such modern cultures, there were plenty of cultures that accepted claims without evidence.
eudaimonia,
Mark
Does it sound like him? I've read very little Dawkins.
BTW, I wasn't referring to the intricacy and complexity of life. Sure, scientific subjects have an "awe and wonder" factor. I love science. My father is a PhD research scientist. Many is the time I have looked at the night sky, or...
I do believe in a spirit -- one's conscious mind or "psyche". I simply don't believe that it can exist without a living body or survive after death. However, it is of profound concern to me.
I suppose you could say that I am "philosophical", but being philosophical can be much more than what...
It means different things to different people. For Christians who declare themselves "spiritual but not religious", they often mean that religion is just about "ritual" (and perhaps "institutions"), and they want a "relationship" with God instead. They see "religion" as getting in the way of...
I intend to see it, and I wouldn't unless there were people complaining about the movie. This is also why I saw the Last Temptation of Christ.
eudaimonia,
Mark
I've taken this test several times before. I always get Nontheism, UU, and Secular Humanist in my top three. I've head of all these, and they are no surprise to me.
eudamonia,
Mark
According to my nontheistic philosophical path, our naturally appropriate purpose is to flourish -- to grow and self-actualize -- as the unique individuals we are.
eudaimonia,
Mark
I've seen this. My answer is "no, plants aren't conscious". The mechanism for the motion I think you mean is well-known to biologists, and doesn't seem to involve any serious contemplation on the part of the plant.
What makes you think those are "decisions" in the normally accepted sense...
You could have fooled me. You have spelled every word in that post correctly.
I find that many people don't let reality deter them from asserting their views.
eudaimonia,
Mark
It doesn't.
That's a bizzare request, since "everything" keeps on changing. What science can do is provide models for how things change in relation to other things. That seems to be quite enough for a theory of "everything".
eudaimonia,
Mark
[/COLOR]
Let me politely suggest that you study physics before developing arguments along these lines. You may find the answers already there, instead of in theology.
eudaimonia,
Mark
It occurs to me to add another point, which I think important. I've never been fond of "ground of all being" or "necessary being" style metaphysics. It may be that everything that exists has a conditional (or "contingent") existence, since every entity may exist at least in part in relation to...
This is not a convincing apologetic to me.
I do not think that the Universe (if this means what we loosely think of as physical existence) started with any cause. In my view, the Universe had never "popped" into existence out of nothingness, or out of anything else (if there can even be...
Please don't tarnish modern atheists with Charvaka. You will find that the personal epistemologies of atheists may differ somewhat from Charvaka's. Even atheists who have strong empirical views may disagree with Charvaka on some key issues. I personally would not say that all knowledge is...
Re: Athiest will be born as animals who serve the humanity without any devotion to Go
It's good to know that the stigmatizing and dehumanizing of atheists is not something limited to Christians. Prejudice can exist just about anywhere. Thank you for enlightening me.
eudaimonia,
Mark
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.