Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id XAA17782 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 5 Feb 2002 23:18:31 GMT X-Originating-IP: [209.240.222.132] From: "Scott Chase" <ecphoric@hotmail.com> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 18:12:49 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: <F43bJMa0JpIGRFh6qb9000038bb@hotmail.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Feb 2002 23:12:49.0529 (UTC) FILETIME=[A12BE690:01C1AE9A] Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>From: "Steve Drew" <srdrew_1@hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 22:31:47 +0000
>
>Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 15:38:32 -0000
>From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk>
>Subject: RE: Islam's Captive Women
>
> <Atheism. It is impossible. to my mind, to prove or disprove the
>existence of god, so Atheism is a religion of sorts. This does not stop
>the
>>sociobiologists from from asssigning *roles* :-)>
>>
> >Atheism means the absence of religious belief, it is in no way
>equivalent to or the same as a religion. Atheists do not share moral
>and
>ethical codes, do not share attitudes towards things like race and
>gender
>etc. as a result of their being atheists.<
>
>I was not aware that religions had the same shared attitudes etc.
>
> >Religions claim that it is impossible to prove or disprove the
>existence of god, and that in itself is a reason to reject them- they
>reject
>the notion of falsifiability, and therefore their assertions are
>irrational.<
>
>Religions do reject the notion of falsifiability, but not the proof of gods
>existence. "except by faith" etc is their proof, which i agree is not
>scientific. If you do have a proof of gods non existance, i would love to
>know as there are always god botherers around i would like to upset. What i
>meant by atheism having anti women components was as i said, that those of
>the reductionist sociobiological bent force roles upon males and female,
>with the females copping for the worst of it.
>
Sociobiology takes a stance on the evolutionary bases of behavior. I don't
see a necessary relevance for existence/non-exitence of a deity or designer
in sociobiology. There isn't a likely one to one correpondence between
sociobiology and atheism. Some atheists might not agree with sociobiology
and it could be possible for some sort of theistic evolutionist to agree
with the tenets of sociobiology.
>
>One of my tutors pointed out that agnosticism may be the best choice - God
>may or may not exist, but i will worry about it only when he knocks on my
>door.
>
>
I prefer agnosticism to atheism, the latter tending to take a stronger
stance on the existence of a deity.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 05 2002 - 23:28:02 GMT