...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
"Darwinists don't accept direction in evolution." -- Swenet
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] Here are the points I've been arguing, for those who are wondering. Notice that they're not addressed in this thread, whether deliberately or due to absent-mindedness or ignorance [list] [*]Darwinism is a product of the default scientific worldview, which is the Newtonian worldview. The Newtonian worldview is a European doctrine, that evolved out of the clockwork universe concept (see deism). [/list] [list] [*]Cutting edge science has moved on from the Newtonian worldview, but mainstream science has not. [/list] [list] [*]As a result, Darwinism and all other mainstream evolutionist thought has never been updated to reflect the fact that life forms are not Newtonian systems. [/list] [list] [*]Refusing to update and rethink in light of cutting edge findings allows mainstream science to protect its cherished pet theories. Sometimes they do more than ignoring; sometimes they destroy careers of people who reject the Newtonian worldview [/list] [list] [*]The taboo resting on the discussion of consciousness in some quarters, and the reduction of consciousness to a secondary and illusory side-effect of the brain in other quarters, is an important part of that defensive strategy. [/list] [list] [*]The stakes are high. Should consciousness turn out to be fundamental in nature (and not an illusory, secondary by-product of electro-chemical activity), the whole house of cards mainstream science is resting on, would implode [/list] [list] [*]The house of cards should have imploded already. In the 20th century all sorts of experiments have disproved the Newtonian worldview. The double slit experiment is just one of them. Even if you argue that consciousness has nothing to do with the double slit experiment, it still disproves the Newtonian worldview. No matter how you slice it. The Newtonian worldview has natural laws acting on their own, with humans being passive props who are governed by natural forces in every aspect of lives. Yes, that means even free will is an illusion in the Newtonian worldview (see determinism). But we now know, as a result of the aforementioned experiments, that this is bogus. The Newtonian worldview is a toxic and dangerous European doctrine that needs to be understood in the context of the philosophical climate it arose and developed. If you accept the Newtonian worldview you either made a choice to subscribe to it knowing what it entails (basically, that you're a zombie who is in the illusion of making decisions that are, in fact, made by the brain without your involvement) or you've been indoctrinated. No in-betweens. If you made the deliberate choice to accept the Newtonian worldview, you're a dupe. If you've been indoctrinated and don't start thinking for yourself after someone tells you what it entails, you're a dupe. [/list] [list] [*]The statement that god is not needed in science comes from the Newtonian worldview. Whether or not the traditional god exists is irrelevant. The point is that claiming "we don't need [insert x] in science" is not a scientific statement. What is really happening here is people are secretly speaking from the Newtonian worldview, which they're not upfront about. They need to admit to speaking on behalf of materialist community, not on the behalf of the scientific community. Watch for the strawman attacks next as some will deflect from the fundamental point I'm making and accuse me of being religious. [/list] [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3