1 Nerd-It - +

RE: Agnostic nonsense…

Comment a comment by Peter Bell (gnifyus), published on 04 July 2009
Navigate to the top level to view all replies to the link Faith Kills Infant
Navigate up one level to see this comment's parent.
a lone nerd has left 1 comment below

to word the question more precisely would be to ask, “To what purpose are we here?”

Yes, and that was really what I was driving at. In believing there is a purpose, it naturally follows that there also has to be a conscious outside force determining that purpose. All I was trying to say was that merely moving the question of causality one more rung up the ladder does little to answer the question as to whether that divine entity exists. It only postpones the mystery one more chapter, so to speak.

So, you suggest that questions of vacuum fluctuations don’t address the question of why we’re here — but I think you’re wrong. I think they address them quite profoundly.

Yes, they certainly would if I was speaking in terms of science explaining the world, but, as I said above, for a man who is searching for God and ultimate purpose, they do not.

Just because you want an answer doesn’t mean you get one.

I agree, but that statement applies to certain questions about the physical world also. If you don’t want an answer for something you are almost certain not to get one either. That’s probably why spirituality continues even though the physical world becomes more and more defined without finding or including any provable traces of divinity.

Thread parent sort order:
Thread verbosity:
2 Nerd-Its - +
RE: Agnostic nonsense… by scottb :: NR8

Yes, they certainly would if I was speaking in terms of science explaining the world, but, as I said above, for a man who is searching for God and ultimate purpose, they do not.

Hm. The point I was trying to make (evidently without success) is that the distinction is an artificial one. Either teleological questions can be answered “in terms of science explaining the world”, or they’re entirely fatuous.

“Searching for ultimate purpose” is like snipe hunting. The snipe hunter has failed to question whether his quarry even exists, simply assuming it does from his companions’ testimony. Teleological questions, if purely physical answers are considered unacceptable, are based on a similar bad assumption — dualism.

Posted 05 July 2009, Hide, Parent, Reply

The Showcase

Nerd-Its   Nerd Trends   Last Ten  

  1. RE: Hurt Locker Blows Hard -- but not as hard as Green Zone in Hurt Locker vs Reality
  2. Source for Religious Affiliation? in Scientology: We've had it with you
  3. RE: Where to start learning, and government support of religion in Scientology: We've had it with you
  4. RE: The true solution in Scientology: We've had it with you
  5. RE: The true solution in Scientology: We've had it with you
  6. RE: Hurt Locker Blows Hard -- but not as hard as Green Zone in Hurt Locker vs Reality
  7. RE: Catholic Exorcist in Catholic Exorcist Points Finger at Vatican
  8. RE: The true solution in Scientology: We've had it with you
  9. RE: Where to start learning, and government support of religion in Scientology: We've had it with you
  10. RE: The true solution in Scientology: We've had it with you

What is OmniNerd?

Omninerd_icon Welcome! OmniNerd's content is generated by nerds like you. Learn more.

Voting Booth

Winter Olympic sports?

View Results, All Polls
38 votes, 12 comments