![]() |
| Welcome to Religious Forums |
| Welcome Guest to ReligiousForums.com . You are currently not registered. When you become registered you will be able to interact with our large base of already registered users discussing topics. Some annoying Ads will also disappear when you register. Registering doesn't cost a thing and only takes a few seconds. We provide areas to chat and debate all World Religions. Please go to our register page! |
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Traditional Christianity can be historically verified. Its basis is the claim about a historical event, the resurrection. So at least it is theoretically falsifiable. If one can provide evidence the resurrection didn't happen, that'd be a potential epistemic defeater for Christianity.
__________________
Look at you. You think you're something special, don't you? God's gift to the universe. Right? Well, you're wrong and it's starting to get on everybody's nerves. |
|
#32
|
||||
|
||||
|
Perhaps "know-how" is a system of language and symbolism that is provisional or transient and changeable only because of its sole usefulness in allowing us a certain interactive level with the present temporal reality.
|
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
Huh??
__________________
Look at you. You think you're something special, don't you? God's gift to the universe. Right? Well, you're wrong and it's starting to get on everybody's nerves. |
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
I would like to know, what is dogmatic about science?
|
|
#35
|
||||
|
||||
|
Piltdown Man was dogmatized for some decades.
Regards, Scott
__________________
Author, Sword of the Dajjal, e-book, from http://www.booksforabuck.com/sfpages...rd_dajjal.html http://www.fictionwise.com/eBooks/eBook47261.htm?cached Jars of Doom Jan., 2008 Champagne Books I Blog!: http://cscottsaylorsbooks.blogspot.com/ |
|
#36
|
|||
|
|||
|
Matter-energy is still assumed to be the bottom line even though as a theory it doesn't hold water.
__________________
“If the doors of perception were cleansed, everything would appear to man as it is, infinite. For man has closed himself up, till he sees all things through the narrow chinks of his cavern.” WILLIAM BLAKE |
|
#37
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
"Atheism is a non-prophet organization" George Carlin |
|
#38
|
||||
|
||||
|
The difference I see is that science is necessarily provisional because this is demanded by the underlying attributes that discern science from non-science. If something isn't provisional then regardless of what else it may be, it cannot be science.
However, religious provisionality is contingent. Therefore, it is perhaps more accurate to say that it is epistemologically better to be provisional than not and that any religion which does not accept this is epistemologically inferior to the scientific method. Conversely, any religion which accepts this is equal to the scientific method in this regard.
__________________
Last edited by Fluffy; 04-28-2008 at 07:41 AM. |
|
#39
|
||||
|