Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id SAA05907 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Mon, 24 Sep 2001 18:51:23 +0100 Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 18:32:13 +0100 To: email@example.com Subject: Re: Dawkins was right all along Message-ID: <20010924183213.A752@ii01.org> References: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3102A6D022@inchna.stir.ac.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.15i In-Reply-To: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3102A6D022@inchna.stir.ac.uk>; from firstname.lastname@example.org on Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 12:58:24PM +0100 From: Robin Faichney <email@example.com> Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 12:58:24PM +0100, Vincent Campbell wrote:
> > > >Didn't Christ have something to say about children?
> >> Ah, but who listens to him anymore...?
> <This reply is a deliberate attempt to avoid answering the question,
> > and therefore intellectually dishonest.
> > I have now demonstrated both dishonesty and irrationality in your own
> > style of militant atheism, Wade.>
> Surely, Wade was simply making a joke.
Humor is one of the commonest ways of evading a serious point.
> Citing Jesus and children is not wise given the absence of
> information in Christianity of Jesus' childhood. Why is there this absence?
> Because he would have been brought up as a Jew, and you can't have that in
> Christian doctrine.
At the time the gospels were written there would have been no way to
find out anything about the period before he started to act strangely
and therefore memorably.
> Besides what does Jesus say about kids that counteracts
> the point being made that beliefs, in the sense of religious faiths, are not
> autonomously arrived at but learned?
You really think I'm arguing with that? Not wouldn't I dispute it, I
have difficulties imagining that anyone would.
Wade said that religion commonly denies childhood. My point is that
doesn't seem to be the case for Christianity.
> (<"The distinction between mind and matter is in the mind, not in
> Except that, without any matter there'd be no mind.)
Where's the contradiction?
-- Robin Faichney "It is tempting to suppose that some concept of information could serve eventually to unify mind, matter, and meaning in a single theory," say Daniel Dennett and John Haugeland. The theory is here: http://www.ii01.org/
=============================================================== 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 : Mon Sep 24 2001 - 19:00:21 BST