Subject:
|
Re: Arguing about nature, Nature, and ethics
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 22 Dec 2000 21:17:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
551 times
|
| |
|
|
In response to "Tom Stangl" <toms@netscape.com> in message
news:3A438E9B.2D4C9A9D@netscape.com...
> > A few things come to mind here, but let me just mention just one: I
> > responded to another post by noting that in my view the soul informs and
> > sets parameters to the biology of the individual far more than changes • in
> > one's DNA (neo-Darwinism's medium for change). (DNA, in my view, may be
> > more like bricks and mortar - or a recipe for such - than an architects
> > drawing.) This would guarantee the preservation of that archetypical • human
> > nature, which wouldn't be subject to mutation and natural selection. • What
> > do you do with the soul? What role does it play in your view?
>
> This is all assuming you BELIEVE in "the soul".
Apparently you don't, Tom? Am I understanding you correctly, or are you
just making an observation?
Steve
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
17 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
