Quote from ARogueTrader:It is amusing watching someone use Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny to make some point, when both those concepts are in practice known to be false when utilized by adults who are doing so for the benefit of their children, and compare them to the concept of order flowing from a source of orderliness, design from a designer.
More amusing to watch people use irrational and unsupported notions of order from designers, when they do not know any of that is not false, or to be more likely than Santa.
One day, like the children who eventually become aware of the real nature of Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny and their purposes , the more adult will become aware that the design from a designer concept may well be as useful and just as mythical as either Santa or the Bunnies.
So amazing is the human mind, that it can rest its sense of superiority on the foundation of logic, reason, and physical perceptions, yet at the same time accept and embrace a theory that the mind itself is but an accidental event in the universe....proceeding from the idea that the development and construction of the mind is but a wholly random occurrence without design, plan, or order behind it.
Yes you are correct I think the human mind is amazing. Amazing enough not to accept such statements of assertion, presupposition and assumption on face value.
The human mind, having amazing attributes, uses them not to blindly accept
âthe development and construction of the mind is but a wholly random occurrence â¦.â Or that there must be
âdesign, plan, or order behind itâ
Presumably you provide these comments for the purposes, or for the same convenient argument, as a Santa Claus is to children.
Why should those who think about
âthe development and construction of the mindâ have reason to conclude it
âis but a wholly random occurrenceâ??
Evolution is not a
âwholly random occurrenceâ I know of no science which states the mind is
âbut a wholly random occurrenceâ or that it was created by a creator either?
Oh well, children dress up as adults and play house, so it follows that the "adult" mind is capable of thinking within its own limited confines to a conclusion of no higher intelligence at work than itself.
So adults dress as children and conclude that there is a higher intelligence, when there is no evidence of any - and that isnât childishness, confined within its own childish intelligence ?
A mind, fixed and bound by concepts of relativistic logic, limited space, and time will forever run in circles around its own source of intelligence
Nothing exists unless it is in space and time.
Without ârelativistic logicâ there is no substance to judgments or conclusions and anything is unconnected to the universe, planets, people, events, individuals or to the situations any are involved. Without ârelativistic logicâ there are no situations.
And without any of that time space and ârelativistic logicâ stuff, you have a gobbledegook which is fixed and bound in meaningless nonsense.
I suspect if a light bulb had consciousness and self reflective abilities, like many self centered human beings, it would think that being lit from within and shining forth, it was the source of light in the room. Little would the light bulb know of the external wiring and energy flowing through it, as it would be so absorbed in basking in its own sense of brilliance, that it could never understanding that it is just a medium of the flow of designed energy.
Human beings are not that way. They do not act as you would have your light bulb do.
Unlike the light bulb, some use the consciousness they hold for enquiry and to establish whether or not there is, or could be, external wiring and a power source created by a separate being or entity. Apparently no confirmation of this whatsoever exists, and over the millennia of endless debates and demands by some apologists, there is no reasonable or substantial evidence that there is or ever was
It has become so very apparent, that the only means of understanding creation and existence, is to use scientific principles and explanation in an attempt to comprehend them.
People do this because they donât want to rely on assumption and assertion like your light bulb. They can see perhaps that doing so leads to ignorance and some need for a guilt ridden demeaning self-depreciation, which then takes the lazy route to a metaphysical ,invisible, unknowable creator designer thing, which in the end requires no explanation!!
When there is an external objective validation of logic, reason, and sensual perception, that validation being independent of the use of logic, reason, and sensual perception in order to ensure proper calibration of said faculties, then and only then could the level of certainty espoused by the relativistic thinkers match the certain conclusions of the reality of their ideas.
How can there be a logical and reasoned validation of any sort without the use of logic and reason.??
And, why should the sensual perceptions designed by this intelligent designer not provide the perception they were designed for anyway ? One of those being that logic and reason are meaningful and offer a means to definitions of true and factual.
Another thing, if what you say were correct, then it applies equally to your thinking of a design from a designer concept too. If in your view logic reason and sensual perception leaves ârelativistic thinkersâ without validation, then equally it must leave your design from a designer notion without validation .
Or is that too logical to be validated !!
You would use something which is not logical to test logic? Are you a Lutheran??
