 | | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water? & Is religion dead in the water?
|
|
(...) That's the wrong way to ask the question, IMO. Or at the very least you're setting a task for science that isn't science's responsibility to answer. The more precise phrasing is this: Are there systems and components in nature that cannot be (...) (20 years ago, 19-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water? & Is religion dead in the water?
|
|
(...) The original poster wanted to know how we (our behavoir) could be more than the sum of our biological parts. I simply pointed out the relevance of such an issue in the context of systems engineering. That itself isn't magic, it is a well-known (...) (20 years ago, 19-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water? & Is religion dead in the water?
|
|
(...) I see that as analogous to believing in an omnipotent God that has all the answers, and decides not to tell you them all just yet. (...) The operative word being "may". I don't happen to believe that everything is or will necessarily be (...) (20 years ago, 19-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water? & Is religion dead in the water?
|
|
(...) So the whole can be completely, thoroughly, logically, scientifically explained by the sum of the parts? As in there's no magic at all? If there are systems and components we don't understand scientifically today, there will be a time in the (...) (20 years ago, 19-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water? & Is religion dead in the water?
|
|
(...) How are we that different? Do we possess any unique basic attributes that set us apart from the rest of the animal kingdom, or do we simply possess a unique combination and degree of shared attributes? Animal research has suggested that we are (...) (20 years ago, 18-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water?
|
|
(...) The problem you're citing is basically one of semantics, so I don't think it's a good refutation of Lee's posited mathematical absolute. Whether you refer to "four" as 10 or IV or cuatro or 4, the underlying numeric principle is the same, and (...) (20 years ago, 18-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water? & Is religion dead in the water?
|
|
You know, for a time now I have wanted this whole thing to go away and stop appearing on the main news page, for you see, I have a terrible weakness: a great fascination in philosophy. So, this whole discussion was honey to me and I was having a (...) (20 years ago, 18-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Is religion dead in the water?
|
|
(...) I'm a little confused since the definitions you choose to quote above have utterly nothing to do with the link you provide. That is talking about his intellectual approach and not atheism at all, except in the most passing manner possible. (...) (20 years ago, 17-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A question for my Canadian pals
|
|
(...) It's an interesting point you make about owing healthcare to the world, especially right now with the shortage of the flu virus vaccinations happening. Ontario, where I live, used to provide free flu virus shots to anyone that walked into a (...) (20 years ago, 16-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Insert Tab A into...wait, which one's Slot B?
|
|
(...) You know, I found that quite amusing at first, but then I got to remembering stuff, like how when you work with steel, you have to use sticks of soapstone to make your cut marks if you want to be able to see them easily. And how I got to (...) (20 years ago, 16-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
