The Mixing Of Science And Politics

[shunyadragon]

Given that your habit here is to reach for the first thing you google up which you think supports your point (regardless of provenance, and whether or not it actually does), I have my doubts that you are any more objectively neutral in other areas.

Does not answer the question, be specific!!!!! Where have I not done that?

Blanket accusations and generalizations are meaningless.

[seer]

Does not answer the question, be specific!!!!! Where have I not done that?

Blanket accusations and generalizations are meaningless.

Exactly Shuny, where have you NOT done that!

[One Bad Pig]

Does not answer the question, be specific!!!!! Where have I not done that?

That's a very good question. I don't recall you ever citing an internet source which was both solid and actually proved your point.

Blanket accusations and generalizations are meaningless.

This would, itself, appear to be a blanket statement - and thus, by your own estimation, meaningless.

[Sparko]

That's a very good question. I don't recall you ever citing an internet source which was both solid and actually proved your point.

This would, itself, appear to be a blanket statement - and thus, by your own estimation, meaningless.

He is reverting back to his demand for a cite! when, he never provides anything other than the first google result that agrees with him without any actual cite.

he figures (correctly) that no-one will bother hunting through all of his previous posts to provide him with evidence that everyone already knows is true, including him. And if they do, he gets the satisfaction of wasting their time, and then ignoring the evidence anyway.

[Sparko]

ETA - just for kicks:

Here you go Shuny:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...l=1#post423758

[shunyadragon]

ETA - just for kicks:

Here you go Shuny:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...l=1#post423758

Just for kicks?!?!?!

There was nothing misleading nor off the make on my references. The references refer to the development of Methodological Naturalism, and not Methodological Naturalism as it is practiced in modern science. It was a disagreement between me and seer, nothing new, concerning seer's assertion that Methodological Naturalism is the same as Philosophical Naturalism.

The fact that seer selectively rejects science, and Methodological Naturalism unless it agrees with his Theist agenda comes into play here.

Actually this is true the development of Methodological Naturalism did in fact reject the assumptions of Theist Teleology, which previously western science was based on Theist Teleological assumptions. Likewise Utilitarian Teleology and NMN developed to explain morals and ethics as having non-Theist explanations of origins, and rejected Theist Teleological assumptions.

It is obvious that if you propose a non-Theist explanation for anything in our physical existence, you will, of course, reject Theist Teleological explanations.

For example: Theist Teleological explanations for the Biblical flood and Noah's Arc, versus the non-Theist explanation for the physical evidence.

[seer]

Just for kicks?!?!?!

There was nothing misleading nor off the make on my references. The references refer to the development of Methodological Naturalism, and not Methodological Naturalism as it is practiced in modern science. It was a disagreement between me and seer, nothing new, concerning seer's assertion that Methodological Naturalism is the same as Philosophical Naturalism.

The fact that seer selectively rejects science, and Methodological Naturalism unless it agrees with his Theist agenda comes into play here.



For example: Theist Teleological explanations for the Biblical flood and Noah's Arc, versus the non-Theist explanation for the physical evidence.

Shuny stop fibbing. In the discussion that Sparko linked we were arguing about ethics, the link you used had nothing to do with ethics. Because it had the word utilitarian you took that to mean utilitarian ethics, where it was actually speaking of the scientific process. You just grabbed a link that had nothing to do with the discussion, a link you yourself did not understand.

[shunyadragon]

Shuny stop fibbing. In the discussion that Sparko linked we were arguing about ethics, the link you used had nothing to do with ethics. Because it had the word utilitarian you took that to mean utilitarian ethics, where it was actually speaking of the scientific process. You just grabbed a link that had nothing to do with the discussion, a link you yourself did not understand.

No problem, science is indeed 'utilitarian,' and makes no assumptions, hypothesis nor theories for philosophical/theological beliefs not supported by physical verifiable evidence.

Science does not deal with the subjective anecdotal claims of Theology and Philosophy that cannot be falsified by theories and hypothesis, but through studies of neurology, anthropology, and behavioral sciences, science can deal with the objective basis of morals and ethics.

[seer]

No problem, science is indeed 'utilitarian,' and makes no assumptions, hypothesis nor theories for philosophical/theological beliefs not supported by physical verifiable evidence.

Science does not deal with the subjective anecdotal claims of Theology and Philosophy that cannot be falsified by theories and hypothesis, but through studies of neurology, anthropology, and behavioral sciences, science can deal with the objective basis of morals and ethics.

What do you mean no problem? The point was and is that your quote in the other thread had nothing to do with what we were discussing at the time. And anyone can go back and see that that is the case.

[Sparko]

What do you mean no problem? The point was and is that your quote in the other thread had nothing to do with what we were discussing at the time. And anyone can go back and see that that is the case.

that is why I said "just for kicks" because I already knew it was a wasted effort. Shuny just asks for cites as a way to pretend to be scholarly, but what he is really doing is hoping the person will think it is too much trouble and go away. And even when presented with cites, Shuny merely hand waves them away. That is why I just did it for kicks, not expecting Shuny to actually own up to his actions of just using the first google result he finds.