08-07-2007, 06:47 PM | #11 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
As I understand philosophers traditionally equate evil with suffering and this is particularly so with respect to "the problem of evil." I was more dismissive of the problem of evil when I was younger. But with experience and maturity it has become more of a problem for me, I confess.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster |
08-07-2007, 06:54 PM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 3,005
|
You missed the point. Your methodology is the issue.
__________________
太初有道 |
08-07-2007, 06:54 PM | #13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
|
Quote:
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos. |
|
08-07-2007, 07:02 PM | #14 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
The article goes on to say that the problem of evil and hence Darwinism is not a problem for Deism. Deism is not the type of worship described in the quote.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster |
08-07-2007, 07:09 PM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Norcal
Posts: 5,821
|
|
08-07-2007, 07:25 PM | #16 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
LOL. A bom apologist lecturing me about "methodology." The old big word dropping tactic. Personally, I don't know if religious people are more immoral than non-religious people. I have read studies that say the answer is at best inconclusive, and much depends on how you categorize Stalin and Hitler, as practicing secularism or a type of dogma and hence religion. I was simply resonding to Indy's clear insinuation that atheists used natural selection as a rationale to disclaim God with an ulterior motive, and citing a famously religious person (apparenlty often quoted in GC) to make the point that the case is not at all open and shut in favor of religious people. I simply employed a common rhetorical device, and unlike your FARMSy friends have never engaged in a pretense of being scientific or systematic.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster Last edited by SeattleUte; 08-07-2007 at 07:42 PM. |
08-07-2007, 07:36 PM | #17 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 3,005
|
Quote:
If "endogeneity" is too big of a word for you, let me illustrate with an example. "Because high-crime areas have more cops on the street, cops cause crime to go up."
__________________
太初有道 |
|
08-07-2007, 07:39 PM | #18 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
Quote:
If you think economics is not a "warm and fuzzy" type of thing you are sadly deluded. It's social science, which, as I'm sure the real scientists here will verify, is not science at all. Moreover, you probably only got a BS in it. I minored in econ, so there. In any event, between you and me there is only one of us who comes here pretending to be something he is not.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster |
|
08-07-2007, 07:51 PM | #19 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 3,005
|
Quote:
I currently only have a bachelor's, but I've taken graduate-level methodology courses. I know enough to read and understand empirical literature. I agree.
__________________
太初有道 |
|
08-07-2007, 08:35 PM | #20 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
__________________
εν αρχη ην ο λογος |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|