Introducing myself with an explanation of basic terminology like objective and absolute

(Roger A. Sawtelle) #101

@mitchellmckain, Thank you for your response.

I am glad that you acknowledge my point.

Monists have a problem here. Things interact with each other because there is no separation between them, that is they are all physical, If humans are really things because they are wholly physical as monists say, then they would interact in the same way as other physical things. However there is separation between humans and nature because we are rational (and spiritual) as well as physical beings.

Thanking is required in doing science because science is rational. It take rational thought to apply the scientific method properly. Good hypotheses do not come out of the thin air. They come out of observation and thinking. As you say honesty is very important and based rationality which you say is subjective. To say that anyone can do science is not really true. I hope that not everyone can do your scientific job.

Science is based on facts which is good, but people looking at the same facts can disagree as to what they mean. Evolution is not just looking at DNA, which objective up to a point, but disagree as to how DNA works. You seem to think that living creatures are self organized, rather than organized based on the DNA that they inherited from their parents. What is you evidence for this?

Science is objective, that is based on reliable experience, and subjective, that is based on creative rational thinking, but so is philosophy and theology. They work somewhat differently because each deals with different subject matter, just as different sciences are different because of the same situation.

Evolution is based on the geological evidence that we finds in the rocks, but it is not obvious as to the relationship between fossils and why the dinosaurs died out. That is where thinking and rationality come in and why science is rational and needs rationality.

My answer to the problem of science, (philosophy) and faith is that each needs to stay in its own lane. Yours deems to be that we need to toss out any pretense that rationality has a important role in life, because it is physical, not rational.

I am not exaggerating anything. I am just pointing out the facts which poke holes in your materialist ideology. There is no shame in truth, but you are over-reacting in such a hysterical manner that it suggests that your position is on thin ice.

I have no doubt that you are not interested in my point of view, because you have accepted another ideology, hook, line, and sinker.

Trying to force our belies and values on anyone is morally unacceptable anywhere and in any place. Of course it does not work.

Trying to browbeat creationists (YEC) to believe on evolution and atheism as was done by atheists is morally unacceptable. BioLogos is trying to engage YEC theologically as well as through science in order to help them better understand the world God created.

This is a philosophical statement, which means that it can only be verified by philosophical thinking which you have rejected.

Here you make science the arbitrator over the reasonableness of spiritual and rational beliefs, which follows only if the physical is superior to the spiritual and rational. That is no9t true because the physical has a Beginning, while the spiritual and rational does not.

We know that this is true because of the objective fact of the Big Bang that says that the universe has an absolute Beginning.

This is a completely subjective standard, which completely unsubstantiated. It is forcing your values on others.

(Laura) #103

(Laura) #104

Looks like this topic has run its course. If anyone would like to continue discussing a spin-off subject matter, feel free to start a new thread. Thanks.