Interesting conversation, I'm enjoying it. You know, I don't necessarily hate Richard Dawkins; the guy seems like a very inteligent person. I just hate the snide, dickhead attitude he exudes. If he presented his arguements without the arrogance I think a lot more people might be willing to listen to him objectively. Thats an issue I notice with many Athiests; I personally believe in a Christian God but never would shove my belief down someone's throat but the Athiests I know don't give the same option most of the time, it's a sort of arrogant, talking down, snippy attitude which I don't understand.
Last edited by The Night Owl; 03-19-2009 at 07:28 AM.
Last edited by The Night Owl; 03-19-2009 at 07:45 AM.
Now to complicate the matter, from my theist world view nothing is random and the outcomes are are understood bythe Creator beforehand. When we use the word chance what we really mean is that we don't know enough about the initial conditions of a series of causes and effects to understand the outcome.
As far as we know, there is no such thing as 'random' in the general chaotic sense that we usually think in laymens terms.
We could talk for pages on the nature of 'randomness', but it generally means is that something is simply outside the limits of our computational capacity... so with that in mind, how on earth do you conclude that if something is outside the limits of our computational capacity, that it must be meaningless?
Last edited by wilbur; 03-20-2009 at 03:02 PM.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|