From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 4 11:42:49 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F04A37B400 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 2002 11:42:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from directvinternet.com (dsl-65-185-140-165.telocity.com [65.185.140.165]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 170DD43E42 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 2002 11:42:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nwestfal@directvinternet.com) Received: from Tolstoy.home.lan (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by directvinternet.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g84IgjGd059876; Wed, 4 Sep 2002 11:42:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nwestfal@directvinternet.com) Received: from localhost (nwestfal@localhost) by Tolstoy.home.lan (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) with ESMTP id g84Igjjr059856; Wed, 4 Sep 2002 11:42:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: Tolstoy.home.lan: nwestfal owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 11:42:45 -0700 (PDT) From: "Neal E. Westfall" X-X-Sender: nwestfal@Tolstoy.home.lan To: Terry Lambert Cc: Dave Hayes , Subject: Re: Why did evolution fail? In-Reply-To: <3D756FD1.1BA06101@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20020904114037.D88455-100000@Tolstoy.home.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Terry Lambert wrote: > "Neal E. Westfall" wrote: > > Some questions are proven from the impossibility of the contrary. If > > a particular worldview does not provide the preconditions of rationality, > > it should be rejected. For example, the fact that naturalism undermines > > the ability to know whether one's views are true or false eliminates > > naturalism as a viable worldview. In fact, if naturalism is false its > > opposite, supernaturalism must be true. > > Incorrect. > > Naturalism allows one to know *if* their views are false. How? > It just > doesn't permit one to know *that* one's views are true, or merely > a useful approximation of truth which may be later disproven by > future collection of empirical evidence. How is empricism even possible on a naturalistic worldview? Neal To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message