Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (83796)	7/13/2000 4:09:05 PM
From: Jacques Chitte	Respond to of 108807

Well, sorta. One can go through the gleanings of science and test the facts and theories to see if there is something that either supports or directs the teleological inquiry. But my impression is that to date nothing has been found that either strongly supports or strongly contradicts the basic premise of teleology. It's honest to say "Science has not found God." It's equally honest to say "Well that doesn't mean much." <edit> If you accept current cosmological theory - Big Bang, galaxy clusters and the whole thing - then certainly constraints are placed on the nature of God's interaction with the material (observable) universe. In that regard, science does enter into teleological discussion. But it remains that we can't PROVE that the fossils aren't clever tricks, or that the astronomical cosmos isn't some sort of clever prop set up by some divine practical joker par excellence. So there is this unavoidable element of "consensus among reasonable interlocutors" (agreed-upon articles of faith) that permeates all discussion about the nature of things.