The "non-overlapping magisteria" issue. You've sided with Stephen Jay Gould and I've sided Richard Dawkings!
I used to think as you do, Ed! But I got convinced by "The God Delusion". In the book Dawkins argues that "god's existence" (or not) can be approach as a scientific hypothesis. On 4/6/07, Ed Leafe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Apr 6, 2007, at 7:38 PM, Helio W. wrote: > > > Dr. Collins' reasoning that there's no conflict between science and > > faith is very weak. Myth and science don't mix. > > There is no conflict. Faith addresses areas beyond the reach of > science. If it makes you happy to believe that after you die you go > to a fluffy cloud place, then there is nothing in science that > conflicts with that. > > The problem is when zealots on either side try to mix the two. You > cannot prove scientifically that God exists, nor can you prove that > he doesn't. Exactly the same as the case that you can't > scientifically prove that the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists, nor > prove that he does not. > > The converse is also true. You cannot use items of faith as > 'evidence' in a scientific inquiry. Because Holy Book X says that > something is true is worthless when dealing with scientific matters. > > -- Ed Leafe > -- http://leafe.com > -- http://dabodev.com _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
