Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 20:05:33 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: "Neal E. Westfall" <nwestfal@directvinternet.com> Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why did evolution fail? Message-ID: <3D6EE0FD.8FA2080@mindspring.com> References: <20020829191145.E37029-100000@Tolstoy.home.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Neal E. Westfall" wrote: > > > Is there some independent criteria for judging between > > > the two that is not arbitrary? > > > > Yes. Starting from first principles, can you build a working > > light bulb? > > Seems a bit arbitrary to me, besides the fact that both are likely to > claim to be able to do this. However, let's talk about those first > principles. What if the reason that both can build useful things such > as lightbulbs is that one of the two options is relying on concepts > which only make sense given the other's worldview, and in fact is > borrowing those concepts from that other worldview? The Catholic Church had 1800 years to do it, and didn't. Science, once formalized, did it in about 100. I guess I'm just one of those people who has a natural prejudice towards things which allow me to bend matter to my will. "But still, they revolve...". 8-). -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3D6EE0FD.8FA2080>