The God Debate

[Matabele]

nature is god? This is self created nature right?

 

[Dan]

nature is god? This is self created nature right?

Again you misinterpret but at a base level yes!

You are walking blind within this topic and it is not for me to teach you. Read the book, watch some Dawkins lectures and speeches and you will understand better than i can describe!

I refuse to continue the debate until we are on the level ground of both reading the book, otherwise it is simply a waste of my time

 

[Matabele]

The point that Dawkins is making is that natural selection reduces massive improbabilities by sub-dividing them into smaller and more manageable improbabilities.

There are three intellectual blind spots that are characteristic of Dawkins’ rhetoric in his book:

Firstly, Dawkins seems to replace one explanation of gaps (God) for another (luck), which amounts to an intellectual ‘bait and switch’;

Secondly, it replicates a way of argument that has dogged the Intelligent Design movement – that the greater improbability of A must mean B is true, which is of course logically slipshod;

Thirdly, Dawkins assumes that a theist cannot agree with gradual evolutionary change, which produces false dichotomy where a spectrum of opinion exists. (Dan this is where I contend Dawkins makes a flawed pre-siupposition that makes further debate of his points superflous).

 

[Dan]

Oh please, what you are saying is not whatDawkins is about is not at all what he is saying
I wish you would read the book rather than make assumption.

 

[Matabele]

*sniggers*

 

[Dan]

snigger all you want but it just shows you more and more as the fool you are, you take someone elses opinion other than your own and do not know the facts. Juvenile and shows the water your later arguments will hold.

You tip your hand far too early

 

[Matabele]

you take someone elses opinion other than your own and do not know the facts. Juvenile and shows the water your later arguments will hold.

:roll:

Haven't you realised people are tired of our mine is bigger than yours contests yet?

I'll read the book and get back to you.

Of course the quid pro quo is that you read CS Lewis' "Mere Christianity".

 

[Dan]

I am ENTP mate, that by defintion means, i dont care that people are tired of it, the issue is not dead. If they are not interested they simply do not enter the conversation. Stop trying to back out and throw up more hurdles. Stick to the original agreement you c.s.lewis book is irrelevant at this stage

 

[Matabele]

Dan's latest trends:

Dawkins
Bryers Miggs

I wonder what popular culture trend he'll adopt next week?

 

[Dan]

we just did Myer Briggs today, so of course I am goign to follow it. Funnily enough i did one through my own research and came up with the same result, its funny how my profile says "rarely finishes one topic before moving on to the next and always has a new trend or focus"

 

[Matabele]

\"rarely finishes one topic before moving on to the next and always has a new trend or focus\"

 

[Dan]

but shall we psycho analyse you or shall we just use diversion elsewhere?

The reason my previous post reflects my personality type is because I am forever learning

 

[Matabele]

So you've cottoned on to an age old test and call it learning?

I've known I'm ESTJ for years sweety.

 

[Dan]

I knew it before, but yes it's learning, it is something I didnt know in detail prior to now. So yes it is learning my friend, if you dont learn from everything you do in life what is the point in doing it in the first place?

 

[Matabele]

indeed

 

[The Gronk]

ISTJ for me...oh crap I am almost the same as Matas....he is an extrovert though so he would want to be around me if we met, whereas I would rather be somewhere else if he was around. Yeah...THAT'S the reason!!

😉

 

[Matabele]

My I/E is a very close run thing.

 

[Nutzcraw]

What the hell is this ISTJ, ETNP, DSM5 stuff???

 

[Matabele]

Go to Google and type in Myers Briggs

 

[Nutzcraw]

ESTJ for me.