Article <2VOdnYILL92UOHL4nZ2dnZfqn

Deutsch English Français Italiano
<2VOdnYILL92UOHL4nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article
Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!paganini.bofh.team!news.killfile.org!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail
From: *Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Belief - I'd like to share this item with you.
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 00:42:49 +0000
Organization: University of Ediacara
Lines: 217
Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org
Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org
Message-ID: <2VOdnYILL92UOHL4nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com>
References: <l40megFm6p4U1@mid.individual.net>
 <a0af9cb8-49a0-4913-af82-c9514e93e9b9@gmail.com>
 <l41uf1Fs53cU1@mid.individual.net>
 <5f09ba95-910f-4814-8c90-85af86ac1a53@gmail.com>
 <l420huFsg44U1@mid.individual.net>
 <b0b68ab0-f5f6-4202-a2bb-8d68d50488ee@gmail.com>
 <86bk83zbvj.fsf@example.com>
 <b28uti5ccragqn5j3les10435bsvggsqa7@4ax.com>
 <86o7c0fcjk.fsf@example.com>
 <urph9u$ehr8$1@dont-email.me>
 <86frxb8e1h.fsf@example.com>
 <44ycnd-RzOg5sXz4nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <86h6hqt028.fsf@example.com>
 <868r2oamsy.fsf@example.com>
 <usn8ar$3mfeu$1@dont-email.me>
 <864jdcahor.fsf@example.com>
 <usncjv$3nehe$1@dont-email.me>
 <86zfv48zcl.fsf@example.com>
 <B72dnY8vgqBwwHL4nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <86r0gg8n9e.fsf@example.com>
 <fKKdnY_x3vX7CnL4nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <86frww8flc.fsf@example.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89";
	logging-data="19062"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org"
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPhone/iPod Touch)
To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Cancel-Lock: sha1:O309nFECNS/s0WOhB/SdHgufosY=
Bytes: 14566

Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
> *Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> writes:
> 
>> Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
>>> *Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> writes:
>>> 
>>>> Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>>> Ernest Major <{$to$}@meden.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 11/03/2024 15:53, Richmond wrote:
>>>>>>> Ernest Major <{$to$}@meden.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 11/03/2024 14:02, Richmond wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> *Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> writes:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ernest Major <{$to$}@meden.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 28/02/2024 22:29, Richmond wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jillery <69jpil69@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 11:46:40 +0000, Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> erik simpson <eastside.erik@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/25/24 3:24 PM, David B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 25 Feb 2024 at 23:04:07 GMT, "erik simpson"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <eastside.erik@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/25/24 2:49 PM, David B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 25 Feb 2024 at 18:52:30 GMT, "erik simpson"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <eastside.erik@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For the record, I think Behe is pretty close to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a crank.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What evidence do you have for reaching such a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conclusion, Erik?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TIA
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Fellow at Discovery Institute says all you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need to know.  I've not heard of the organisation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> before. I've read here:-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.discovery.org/about/ What do you feel is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contentious?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The focus on Intellligent Design (ID).  This has been
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kicked around on this group for many years, and has its
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proponents.  Obviously, I'm not one of them.  I don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> propose to re-argue this subject.  Check through prior
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussions here if you want to get the flavor of it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not interested in getting involved in such a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In a group whose description is "Evolution versus
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creationism (sometimes hot!)." I would have thought the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> subject will come up over and over.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It has.  My impression is that's one reason so many
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren't interested.  in it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What are the other kinds of creationism apart from I.D.?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> One could argue that ID is all kinds of creationism. The
>>>>>>>>>>>>> distinguishing points of ID are
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) a professed agnosticism about the identity of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> creator ("designer"), at least when wearing one's ID hat.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) a claim, shared with scientific creationism, that there
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is evidence that life was created rather than evolved.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Members of the ID movement can hold to just about any
>>>>>>>>>>>>> version of creationism (include geocentrism and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> platygaianism). ID is a political movement, and theistic
>>>>>>>>>>>>> evolutionists tend not to share the movement's goals, so
>>>>>>>>>>>>> they are rare among ID advocates.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> * abiotic creationists (God created the universe) * single
>>>>>>>>>>>>> creation creationists (God created the urorganism) *
>>>>>>>>>>>>> multiple-creation creationists (God created multiple kinds
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of life) ** young earth creationists *** young earth
>>>>>>>>>>>>> anevolutionists *** young earth hyperevolutionists ** young
>>>>>>>>>>>>> life creationists ** old earth creationists * progressive
>>>>>>>>>>>>> creationists ** episodic progressive creationists (God
>>>>>>>>>>>>> creates successive biotas) ** discontinuous progressive
>>>>>>>>>>>>> creationists (God creates species) ** continuous
>>>>>>>>>>>>> progressive creationism (God creates mutations/selection)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ** occasionalist creationism (Islamo-Calvinist determinism)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are non-Abrahamic forms of creationism. One might
>>>>>>>>>>>>> also consider Raelianism as a non-religious form of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> creationism.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's most useful to define creationism so it lines up with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the fault lines in society, rather than focussing on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularities of belief (defining creationism as
>>>>>>>>>>>>> equivalent to theism isn't helpful.)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hence, my preferred definition of creationism is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "religiously motivated rejection of substantial proportions
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the scientific consensus, especially as relating to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> biology, geology and cosmology, or the promotion
>>>>>>>>>>>>> thereof". The line I'd draw between theistic evolutionism
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and progressive creationism is that the former has God
>>>>>>>>>>>>> guiding the course of evolution but accepts that natural
>>>>>>>>>>>>> processes can produce the same or equivalent result, while
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the latter asserts that natural processes cannot produce
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the modern day biota.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In another context creationism is the position that human
>>>>>>>>>>>>> souls are created de novo, as opposed to traducianism and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> other positions.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, that is fascinating, I had to look up a few words.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> What interests me is: what is it in the human psyche which
>>>>>>>>>>>> made people come up with these theories, and gives them the
>>>>>>>>>>>> energy to keep persuing them even in the face of
>>>>>>>>>>>> adversity. Also the idea of another world, which is more
>>>>>>>>>>>> real than this one, which crops up still in popular culture,
>>>>>>>>>>>> like "The Matrix", a Gnostic idea that the world is created
>>>>>>>>>>>> by something evil, and our purpose is to break free of the
>>>>>>>>>>>> illusion and take our rightful place. I think Jung would say
>>>>>>>>>>>> that other place is the unconscious, and that it created
>>>>>>>>>>>> consciousness in its own image.
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========