<You don't offer any comment so it's hard to see where you actually stand, >
I didn't know you had read the book.
<assuming you agree that there is some sort of ultimate Mind, then so far, so good.>
Oh, I wasn't asking for your approval.
<“If what you hold sacred is not any kind of Person you could pray to, or consider to be an appropriate recipient of gratitude (or anger, when a loved one is senselessly killed), you're an atheist in my book,” writes Dennett.>
Yea, he's probably not an atheist... as I've said before, an "atheist" (IMHO) can really only be "atheist" to a "god" they define. Never understood how anyone could say "I don't believe in ANY god"... I think they mean "any god I've heard of".
<"One reason why many people find Creative Evolution so attractive is that it gives one much of the emotional comfort of believing in God and none of the less pleasant consequences.>
Strange statement... seems to me 'creative evolution' makes sense because it embraces the truth of evolution AND god. Donno what is meant by "less plesant consequences".
<If, on the other hand, you want to do something rather shabby, the Life-Force, being only a blind force, with no morals and no mind, will never interfere with you like that troublesome God we learned about when we were children.>
All those words are human mental constructs. Consider your relationship to one of your liver cells... would it understand concepts YOU use?
<The Life-Force is a sort of tame God. You can switch it on when you want, but it will not bother you.
All the thrills of religion and none of the cost.>
You mean like 'denying god'... or 'turning away from god'? Further, don't confuse religion with god.
DAK |
