John Steck wrote:
I do not think that conclusion
precludes fatalism however. Our future is
not written in stone somewhere. We exercise free will, but it would
be
naive to think we are not largely predictable because of severe
influences
past and present.
This strikes me as a false dichotomy. We
Let me give one more example of what I had in mind. John
Steck wrote:
If you become a student of human
psychology you discover our
sub-conscious decision making ability is severely flawed by life
long
conditioning, education, and natural selection responses. It is
the
cornerstone of marketing
Flawed
in that we truly believe we are freely making unbiased choices and
havelordship over the influences around us. That believe exists only
throughthe bliss of ignorance. Consciously we do sometimes exercise
broad judgment over our impulses, unconsciously we are quite pre-disposed to
John
Steck
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 2:20
AM
Subject: RE: WHAT'S NEW Monday, Jan 03
05
Flawed in that we truly believe we are freely making unbiased choices
and havelordship over the influences around us. That believe
exists only throughthe blis
Jed Rothwell wrote:
John Steck wrote:
I do not think that conclusion precludes fatalism however. Our future is
not written in stone somewhere. We exercise free will, but it would be
naive to think we are not largely predictable because of severe influences
past and present.
This strikes me as
Edmund Storms wrote:
and of course they are
completely bounded by a small set of
rules,
Not any more.
I meant they are bounded by the CPU instruction set, which is still
small, and will probably remain small. (I hope.)
Of course humans
and all life seeks that environment in which it can
It seems that we have come back to Intelligent Design because the universe,
as presently described by scientists, is still too small and too young to
produce the complexity of a living cell by random processes. If Darwin
would have had access to thefindings of molecular biology and
Title: Re: WHAT'S NEW Monday, Jan 03 05
Do you have a reference for that quote?
Harry
revtec at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems that we have come back to Intelligent Design because the universe, as presently described by scientists, is still too small and too young to produce
Personally I do not feel life BEGINS by chance, although the
subsequent evolution is plausibly Darwinian.
Perhaps an E.T. (not necessarily God) has been
'guiding' the evolution of life on this planet.
Anyway, the intelligent design theory is bigger than
religion.
Harry
Grimer at [EMAIL
9 matches
Mail list logo
