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 : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (417)	3/1/2002 10:21:53 AM
From: thames_sider	Respond to of 21057

Alternatively, one can posit - if one dares - something without cause. Or, if one must attribute a motive to that which is motiveless, why prolong the paradox (what causes 'God' then?). We see things which lack knowledge, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. What? A stone lands in position X and this is the 'best result'? Nope, gravity. Philosophy proves nothing, except that we wish to believe in an order and pattern. There is perhaps the only indication, which will probably only be proven false when we find another intelligent life. Back to work, I'm afraid I've really no patience for windiness, however revered. And Aquinas had more time and interest than I.

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (417)	3/1/2002 10:38:06 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 21057

Very good. The very dominance of the Big Bang Theory implies that there is a First Cause. And the very fact that life evolved into multi- cellular organisms, when it should have been content to swim in the primordial ooze, and when it is problematic how one gets cellular differentiation piecemeal, implies a Final Cause.......