Which is interesting Marsha, pretty much my position, I prefer "non-theist" when it comes to my theology (I think I picked that up from Harris ?) so I've moved on to "what next", which turns out in fact to be where I started - like Pirsig - that whilst science is preferable to religion, there is "something wrong in the state of science" too.
"If Phædrus had entered science for ambitious or utilitarian purposes it might never have occurred to him to ask questions about the nature of scientific hypothesis as an entity in itself. But he did ask them, and was unsatisfied with the answers." (Pirsig, ZMM-25th Ed p113) The scary thing is I made that decision years before I'd heard of Pirsig. Regards Ian On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 10:48 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > Greetings Ian, > > Busy day and impossible subject. I do not own the book (The God Delusion), > only the cds, so it would be impossible for me to debate examples. As an > instrument to uproot the concept of God, I think it excellent. I cannot say > every example and argument is perfect, but overall the book is very > successful. Further, if before me the path split, with the continuation to > my left leading to God and religion, and the continuation to my right > leading towards Science, and I were forced to choose one, I would choose the > right-leading path towards Science. As of Wednesday, though, I've decided to > use the non-affirming negative. For me, God does not exist, and God does > not not exist. Poof. Sigh. What next? > > Marsha > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
