Originally posted by Jaxb
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Philosophy 201 Guidelines
Cogito ergo sum
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
The Assumptions of Science
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Jaxb View PostThe practice of science has many assumptions such as the uniformity of nature, the reliability of our senses and cognitive facilities, moral values, and so on. Does God have to exist in order to be justified in believing that these assumptions are true?
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostThere is, of course, no proof, because science cannot prove anything. Of course, God is not likely the sum of everything, and I do not believe this is what panentheism proposes. This is more the view of pantheism. Whitehead assumes a form of 'Intelligent Design' (ID) in his philosophy concerning science. This, , it is a subjective assumption not based on science. The ID movement today faces the same problems when hit the wall and ID cannot be falsified by scientific methods.
Comment
-
Originally posted by metacrock View Postridiculous non answer this is, i said you haven't proven that Whitehead says God is the sum total of all things, you say science doesn't prove things, it's not a matter of science but of reading, read Whithead!
I included the word [origin] here as more reflecting the Theist position. The statement of belief that 'God is the sum total of all things' is something I never proposed, and reflect more a pantheists view, which would likely not be whitehead's beliefs.Last edited by shunyadragon; 08-22-2016, 07:12 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jim B. View PostI would say no, but the fact that there are these traits such as rational order, reliability of our sense and rational faculties, an unconditioned norm of truth, etc are indicative of things we would expect to find if there were a God. This is not logically coercive but circumstantial at best.
I believe in god, but not constructed artificial arguments such as these to justify my belief in God.
Comment
-
Originally posted by metacrock View Postridiculous non answer this is, i said you haven't proven that Whitehead says God is the sum total of all things, you say science doesn't prove things, it's not a matter of science but of reading, read Whithead!
I did say Whitehead supports Intelligent Design, which is a subjective assertion without falsifiable evidence.Last edited by shunyadragon; 08-23-2016, 06:33 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by metacrock View PostProcess thought has it's draw backs but nothing you said proves what I asked for. You have no proof it posits God as sum total of all things. I think it was panenthyeism I said that about.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by shunyadragon, 03-01-2024, 09:40 AM
|
172 responses
611 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seer
04-15-2024, 11:55 AM
|
Comment