philosophy of science: meaning and functions (Introduction)

by David Turell , Saturday, September 22, 2018, 15:45 (2043 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

Tony: "DHW: Why not acknowledge the possibility (which is all it can be) that what we have IS God’s goal – namely, a massive free-for-all, full of nice and nasty, good and evil, joy and sadness, birth and death, extinction and survival?..so ask yourself why there is a higgledy-piggledy bush instead of a straight line to Homo sapiens, and why your God hides, and maybe the answer is that he wanted a higgledy-piggledy bush and once he had set the wheels in motion, he wanted to stop and watch. If he exists, he’s created a great show."

As if somehow he should pop out and give us all the answers to all the questions. Hence my constant reference to you wanting "to have tea with God" in order for you to even acknowledge him. As if that is somehow his responsibility. Isn't the struggle how WE grow, as people?

Now, my belief is that he left us good reference materials, and for the people that can't or won't read it, a wonderful library of his creations to ask questions about and learn. And the parts of his good life guides we ignore, life tends to kick us in the gonads until we get the point.

So, you won't acknowledge him unless he step out from behind a cloud for you, but you won't even dig through his hand books with an open mind and consider the advice in light of your own experiences and You won't even go so far as to acknowledge that he actually exists, because well, you can't KNOW it.

DHW: I suspect that all this boils down to your misplaced belief that I have somewhere attacked your God for creating evil and ugliness.

Tony: No, it all comes down to a kind of odd play at neutrality, that is skewed beneath the surface. Let me ask a simple question. Have you spent as much time researching ANY supposedly 'holy text' compared to the time and energy you have devoted to the study science or philosophy?

Dhw... you are setting up straw men for yourselves to knock down.

No straw men.

Tony: For god to create one offspring, your idea of boredom and/or loneliness is likely spot on. But then they would reach the limits that they could reach as just two, in terms of growth, so they created more ad infinitum. How else would he have the frame of reference to say "It is not good(functional) for man to be alone." and then to proceed to create something whose name was synonymous with passion, to motivate us to our task of molding the world. (Even if the words were never spoken, if you give him credit for creation, you have to give him credit for the thought that went into it.)

Yes, no straw men. Tony has given a Bible-based view of God that is beyond a human being. I cannot do this without Tony's background, so my previous complaints could not have been this full fleshed, but it is obvious I accept Tony's view. I firmly believe as in Adler's view: a personage like no other person.