Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to ident

From: Susan Cogan (Susan-Brassfield@ou.edu)
Date: Tue Dec 12 2000 - 12:35:23 EST

  • Next message: Bertvan@aol.com: "Re: Pascal's wager (was ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to i"

    > >>Bertvan: My hope is to see belief or skepticism of "chance
    >>>and selection" regarded as a legitimate difference of opinion - just as
    >>>materialism and its alternatives are legitimate differences of opinion. I
    >>>have also stated repeatedly that if everyone stopped calling ID
    >>>"creationism", I'd probably lose interest in the controversy.
    >
    >Susan:
    >>That hope will probably never be realized. It's like having a difference of
    >>opinion as to whether Mt. Everest exists. You can believe that it doesn't
    >>exist all you want, but those who believe that it *does* exist are never
    >>going to consider your opinion to be the equal of theirs. An opinion that
    >>can be substantiated with facts based in reality is always going to be
    >>considered of higher quality than an opinion based in religion or wishful
    >>thinking.
    >
    >Bertvan:
    >Yes. While a few people engaged in these discussions appear capable of
    >tolerating opinions other than their own, I've noticed that you don't seem to
    >be one of them.

    back up your opinion with facts and I will respect it.

    Susan 

    -- 
----------

      I am aware that the conclusions arrived at in this work will be 
denounced by some as highly irreligious; but he who denounces them is 
bound to shew why it is more irreligious to explain the origin of man 
as a distinct species by descent from some lower form, through the 
laws of variation and natural selection, than to explain the birth of 
the individual through the laws of ordinary reproduction.

    ---Charles Darwin

    http://www.telepath.com/susanb/

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Dec 12 2000 - 12:36:15 EST