The Evolution will not be televised
Out of context: Reply #80
- Started
- Last post
- 81 Responses
- ********0
Hey discipler, I do appreicate your response to my post - at least you are a good argument, lol..
The point I was trying to make in the second half of my post was that the philosophical construction of a 'God' is necessary only because of the way our minds conceptualise our limited experience..The debate on the exact manner in which environmental forces and chemical properties shape and refine complex systems is somewhat secondary to fundamental principal that we do not yet have the symbolic models to describe everything we observe.
Science, the unending process of conceptualising and modelling experimental experience has not yet reached the point at which it can account entirely for the appearance of said irreducible complexity; the math has probably already been discovered and sat in a paper on a dusty shelf somewhere..
There is no need for any 'faith' from the scientists involved, of anything, least of all 'gaps'..it is the gaps that science seeks to fill.
Is not scientific approach, logic and reason the 'God' at work here ? Surely these aspects of existence are more fundamentally 'magic' and supernatural that the mechanistic processes that you wish to see as 'proof' ?
It is the paradigm of the observer and the observed, the hand that cannot touch itself, or in the case of the creationists, the cart that cannot pull the horse.Again, the back of that head in the mirror is your own, not God.