Science, Faith and harmony

[RichardG (Richard Gillett)]

@T_aquaticus

There are people who oppose the claim that the Earth is round. Just the existence of opposition does not make it legitimate opposition, nor does it make it worthy of teaching in any introductory class on any subject.

And that is supposd to prove what?

Each theory stands on its own, but you never appreciate that.

Richafd

[mitchellmckain (Scientist and Christian)]

@St.Roymond

@mitchellmckain

The intention in making the match is irrelevant. There is only the question of chemicals in the match responding to friction. And no I am not buying into some absurd animism to put the intention (or final cause) into the match itself.

I don’t think intention has a place in teleology in the sense that any material thing has any goal it is aiming for, it is just things doing what they were made to do – and how they were made is not relevant, whether by some supernatural agent or not.

Semantics. You can read “intention” in what I said as simply referring to “what they were made to do.” This has nothing to do with why and whether the match lights or not.

@RichardG

I find this curious. As a Christian I filter all of my understanding through my faith, anything else would seem to be inconsistent and insincere.

The thread seems to still be somewhat disordered from the move, so my response got lost. Ah yes it is the second post of the thread.

@mitchellmckain

@RichardG

I filter all of my understanding through my faith

I noticed.

@RichardG

anything else would seem to be inconsistent and insincere.

Whereas to me this looks both insincere and circular. At least for me it would be.

And I see no testament to Christianity in this, for it is no different than those in any religion. Yes it works for you. But when you make your faith the filter and organizing principle for everything, then of course it works for you. How can anything fail to fit when you simply don’t see anything which doesn’t?

To be sure I make no pretention to objectivity in my Christianity. So I guess you can say I once again seek a balanced approach. And it is natural for me since Christianity is not my starting point. And I certainly make Christianity my organizing principle for the necessarily subjective aspects of life. But it is certainly not my filter for reality itself. Christianity is an answer to certain questions but it is not the whole of my reality or the answer to everything. And I see no value in wearing blinders like a horse to protect me from other things.

[RichardG (Richard Gillett)]

@mitchellmckain

But when you make your faith the filter and organizing principle for everything, then of course it works for you. How can anything fail to fit when you simply don’t see anything which doesn’t?

How can you claim that? You clearly have no idea what I meant or maybe what it is to be religious.

My faith is my life, but it does not prevent me from seeing what is around me, nor do I impose that faith onto it or the people in it. To all intents and purposes my faith is a code of practice and guidance much as army rules and regs do for the military.

@RichardG

anything else would seem to be inconsistent and insincere.

should be taken at face value and not convoluted or twisted into some sort of power trip or attempt at control or domination.

Richard