Date sent: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 13:45:37 -0700 (PDT)

The parts Roger has written are in italics. The parts Toby has written are in normal text.

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

Roger: Hmm... I'm looking at this response, and I have to start with this question: "Where are you getting your science from? What sources are you reading and listening to?"

No insult intended to you, but you've been playing in the pseudo-science pond way too long. The science side of your brain is puckered!

could be, but i need a narrower frame, i read a lot pseudo and not.

I say it this way because I know you like thinking about things, but I can see that in the area of science you've been lead way, way a-stray.

So, I'd like to know what your sources are so I can understand better where you're coming from.

I say this with a lot of emotional attachment. You are my brother, and I find it painful to find your science to be so... misguided, would be the polite term. (another way to put it is that at an emotional level, you're scaring me, because I'm hearing you spout such delusional science, and believing it.)

So, I'd like to know what you've been reading, and I'd like to recommend some alternate reading.

recommend away, but first ask a narrower question, i take no insult, i used to think darwin had to be explained, and think part of it is true, but much is propoganda for the atheists -- who are true believers in every sense of the word!


Date sent: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 14:26:12 -0700 (PDT)

Toby: > Well, I am not surprised you gave it up as a predictive tool, wasn't ever meant to be such a thing? I am fascinated, though, what made you think it would predict?

Roger: My mistake. I was trying to put some utility in the good-evil concept. Without a belief in sentient God, the good-evil concept has no meaning. (my native point of view) I now see that the utility is not in predictive value but in the emotional comfort it gives a sentient God believer. Good! I'm learning.

but that's the sappy answer for tolerant atheists. the value of recognizing good and evil is virtue and direction towards natural law. anything else leads to cruel and brutal societies.

In my native point of view. (what I believe) The value of any belief system springs from it's predictive value

good is more important than prediction, which has no intrinsic value, only instrumental or transitive value.

This means that fortune telling, religion and science all derive from the same well-spring in human thinking -- the desire to know the future.

belief in god springs from knowledge of the future to guide today not from a desire to predict anything

They are all desired because they help humans deal with the future.

When knowlege in a particular area is sparse, fortune telling works well as a future predictor. As knowlege grows in a particular field, religion does a better job than fortune telling.

no kkowledge or little = fortune tellin

a little knowledge to less than adequate amount = religion (half-fast sicentists)

real knowledge, science = religion becomes a drag on the predictive process?

what have YOU been reading

As knowlege grows even more, science does an even better job.

But, if a person is not well versed in what science offers, then the person falls back on religion, or even futher, back on to fortune telling, to do their future predictions.

really do tell who

Science is really good for computer chips -- few priests are called in to help build computer chips. Science is so-so on dealing with mental illness,

not according to freud and neo-friuedians

so religion is often called in to lend a hand.

why bother ?

Neither science nor religion are particularly good at predicting the success of entertainment projects, so actors and producers are known for being supersticious (a form of fortune telling).

baseball players too;

That's my view, and why I'm trying to predict with good-evil.

but with what you said, good-evil can only help if it's true, if its religion it is an automatic set back, allbeit not a set back to voodoo

The parts Roger has written are in italics. The parts Toby has written are in normal text.

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36