Here we go, another thread with posters writing about things they know nothing about but deluding themselves that they do.
I agree completely, Bellcurve.
I only read these threads for a laugh when i see an interesting subject header on the homepage but laugh i always do!
What I find most unbelievable in all of these existential, creationist threads that we see pop-up every day is how theist members and non-theist members continue to think that they will somehow sway the other and condescend each other so much.
You cannot sway a person of faith who holds an a priori assumption about the world, that they are wrong. They will never budge because they are not operating in the realm of logic - be it positivism, empiricism, etc.
It's no different to the famous old debate between Bertrand Russell and Frederick Copleston, which, despite being entertaining, merely reinforced that two intelligent men will never agree if one holds a base assumption about the world, based on faith and what they would describe as personal revelation; and the other, based on the physical and philosophical world.
Sure. I understand that humans naturally seek to understand their surroundings and more broadly, the universe. However, the way i see it, it is fruitless trying to mingle two parties who are from the outset, diametrically opposed and will ultimately be at loggerheads for this same reason.
I'm certain that David Hume had it right when he penned his very pragmatic, intelligent and hard to refute essay at age 21, mulled over and explained it for a few years after, then retreated into a life in the real world, enjoying what life had to offer and directing his intellect towards for every day means.
