Dragan,

Just one thought below..

>>Nahh.. Just VERY busy and I wanted to take a break from the folks here who were talking AT each other rather than WITH each other. I suspect you and a few others do this for sport. <bg>
>
>We had someone, upstream on this thread, start the dispute in a very confused manner, and then the other side(s) wanted to be heard. So it goes.
>
>As for sport... nah, it's a pastime and a mental exercise, and... well, I also want the arguments of my side to be heard, as they aren't heard anywhere in the media. So just the people don't get the wrong idea that 100% of people here (in the States, that is) are believers.
>
>>>As our dear friends on the right would say "look at the other titles from this guy - he has an agenda, and is obviously biased".
>>
>>Well, allI can suggest is that you read through the book. He actually asks a lot of the difficult kinds of questions one should (IMO) ask. And there are lots of referneces.
>
>Which would be fine if I wanted to pursue the study thereof - which I don't intend to, nor have the time to. I've limited myself to what I can read and write here, with an occasional link to an article somewhere.
>
>Judging by comments of the readers, though, it seems this "case for Intelligent Design" has some psychological tricks inside, to say the least, so those who were willing to believe will believe, and those who had doubts will doubt the book too. Besides, interview as a method is the least reliable one, even in psychology. I thought the guy had compiled abstracts from scientific works.

He does actually. That's the whole point of the book. Look at the evidence.

Best,

DD

>
>>>Actually, what's he doing? He's dismantling the very base of belief. Belief doesn't need proof; proof is actually an antidote against believing. Once a thing is proven, you don't have to believe anymore - you got proof. And you can demand proof for the rest as well.
>>
>>I would disagree. Here's where I thik you have a mis-apprehension. Belief is not the opposite of faith.
>
>I didn't put belief as incompatible with faith. I put them both on one side and proof on the other. That's incompatible. You believe/have faith, or you demand a proof. There's no middle ground, unless you count the range between "I'm willing to believe, just give me any proof no matter how flimsy" and "I wasn't sure whether I believe it or not, but now that I got the proof...", which imply fake in either belief or proof.
>
>>Now it isn't tha same as faith either but they can co-exist and there are many many Christian folks who are every bit the thinkiners that non-believers are. The supposition that in order to believe one must stop thinking is absurd,
>
>Didn't say that. You just need to stop applying logic to what you're thinking, and accept the axioms of the dogma as given, no questions asked except "can I have some more?". Remember the one with "how many people did God create"?
>
>But other than that, I'm reckon it requires a whole lot of mental pushups to reconcile the common sense with the dogma.
>
>>There is lots os proof for intelligent design. I'd go so far as to say more for it than against it but to answer the specifics you'll need to read and investigate for yourself. Merely asserting your position without investifating is no more an open mind that what folks will often accuse me or people like myself of, now is it?
>
>You're tempting me to invent yet another example of less-than-intelligent design... but that's cheap humor.
>
>>Closed minds are closed minds no matter what they don't let in.
>>
>>And please don't take that as a personal remark. It is not meant to be one.
>
>I don't have any impersonal mind left... but let's say that my mind is closed to getting into any sort of hierarchical or Borg-like organization (not personal, this one, just a matter of perception), unless that's where I make a living. And I mostly managed to avoid them so far - the draft being the exception. Likewise, I avoid the mental constructs which are the base of such organizations.

Best,


DD

A man is no fool who gives up that which he cannot keep for that which he cannot lose.
Everything I don't understand must be easy!
The difficulty of any task is measured by the capacity of the agent performing the work.