Belief (Evolution)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Saturday, January 08, 2011, 03:06 (4878 days ago) @ David Turell


> > You don't share the same epistemology as me. Observations are not themselves evidence. I stop at the point where life is complex, and do not posit beyond that towards chance or design.
> > 
> > 
> > [EDIT]
> > As for the 'beholder' comment, his point is not. Far from my own. I don't make claims beyond which the knowledge at hand isn't clear. My criticism is in doing exactly that.
> 
> Your philosophic approach is exactly like John Leslie's: Either there is a God (design) and/or there is a multiverse (chance). And you mentioned awhile ago that you did not like Leslie's approach. Why is he wrong?-The only John Leslie (as a physicist) that I'm aware of is the one that invented refrigeration in the early 1800's...-Whoever this modern Leslie is--not that he's wrong, but we can't experiment against a multiuniverse. At least, not in any way I'm aware of. Again, as I've said repeatedly, to me only knowledge counts. I think we spend too much time bandying about in the realm of "speculation as fact" and not enough time considering what it is we really know. It's not fun, but it's at least practical. -A multiuniverse right now is just as likely as a single static universe. For me, someone who is a little more on the side of the layman, I have to wait until the "right" idea is settled on. -The idea that I'm more fond of is a single universe with a "finite history..." I forget the exact term, but if you remember about a year ago at this time I was reading the book from Seth Lloyd "Programming the Universe" which put a computational spin on the universe. -It is not ironic or coincidental that I favor his view. He speaks a language I can easily understand. -But there is no explanation of a beginning in his description--the information theoretic version of the creation of the universe. Only an description of what has happened. (And he admits as much.)

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"