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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: biotech_bull who wrote (84089)	9/13/2008 9:13:03 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 544178

My point was that Agnostics ( 'the impossible to know' group) fall on both sides of the argument whether there is a God. HUH? From Webster: "one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god" If you either believe in or deny god's existence, then you are not an agnostic, by definition. Agnostics are way too small a group, just a few percent of the US population, to be as conceptually varied as you claim. <g> " And on the other end there are those who believe there is a Supreme being...but that Science cannot prove it. " Believers don't need proof. That's what belief is all about. If you had a priest or rabbi who said that there was no proof, would you call him an agnostic? Don't think so. If there were proof, belief and non-belief would be a non-issue.

To: biotech_bull who wrote (84089)	9/13/2008 9:22:37 AM
From: Stan J. Czernel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 544178

Didn't mean to take issue with your point, Biotech - just thought an article from 'outside' might be helpful to the discussion.

To: biotech_bull who wrote (84089)	9/13/2008 3:00:59 PM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 544178

>>I am often puzzled by this last group - the logical inconsistency of accepting the possibility of a Hamlet without a Shakespeare or the string Quartet without a Beethoven!<< BB - I don't think anyone imagines such a thing. As for looking at the Universe, seeing that it is full of wonderful things, and assuming that therefore it must have been created by an intelligent being of some sort, that's quite another matter. The fact that we don't have a perfect understanding of how the Universe came to be is not a compelling argument for the existence of God. One can either say, "we just don't know this," or one can say, "It must have been the work of God." The latter, however, is no more a satisfactory explanation than the former. Essentially, giving credit to God is pretty much the same as saying "It's magic." Even so, I've often said that the Third Brandenburg Concerto is, by itself, a reason to live. - Allen

To: biotech_bull who wrote (84089)	9/13/2008 3:54:12 PM
From: Katelew	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 544178

I am often puzzled by this last group - the logical inconsistency of accepting the possibility of a Hamlet without a Shakespeare or the string Quartet without a Beethoven! Beautifully put. I'm going to have to leave soon for a few hours, but I would be curious to know later,if, in your experience, being a physician has added to your spirituality, detracted from it, or been irrelevant?

To: biotech_bull who wrote (84089)	9/13/2008 4:39:44 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 544178

I am often puzzled by this last group - the logical inconsistency of accepting the possibility of a Hamlet without a Shakespeare or the string Quartet without a Beethoven! Actually, I am puzzled by your puzzlement. Where, after all, did God come from? If existence itself demands a God that created it, doesn't the existence of God demand another creator on the same supposed "logical" ground? Human logic can't resolve this issue. Kant had the final "logical" word on this in The Critique of Pure Reason, and writers like Kierkegaard had the final poetic word on it in his many writings. Not that it was new. The writers of Exodus and theologians like Augustine also knew this, and didn't even try to use "logic" to justify their faith.