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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (46221)	4/4/2002 8:06:36 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

"God could intervene in the lives of people without doing so routinely and I see no reason why God would focus these interventions of miracles on scientific experiments." If you have a rational conception of God it can be subjected to experimentation and verification. If you have a mystical conception of God, it cannot. It cannot be proved..nor can there be an ethical basis, other than (perhaps) blind faith...which could be used to attract the belief of others. It could be argued that the author effectively supports the idea that it is not unreasonable to believe that God does not exist, but he does not effectively support the idea that it is unreasonable to believe that God does exist, or that science demonstrates that it is unlikely that God exists. No. "Unlikely" implies unreasonable to him. If he did not use "unlikely", I believe it was very similar... His point was very clear: if God does exist, She is either entirely in a supernatural world...or She is hiding in ours...