cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board  

Go Back   cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board > non-Sports > Religious Studies

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-07-2007, 06:47 PM   #11
SeattleUte
 
SeattleUte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
SeattleUte has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by creekster View Post
Why does the "suffering' of speices as they are forced to adapt through natural selection necessarily constitute evil?
As I understand philosophers traditionally equate evil with suffering and this is particularly so with respect to "the problem of evil." I was more dismissive of the problem of evil when I was younger. But with experience and maturity it has become more of a problem for me, I confess.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be.

—Paul Auster
SeattleUte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 06:54 PM   #12
ChinoCoug
Senior Member
 
ChinoCoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 3,005
ChinoCoug is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleUte View Post
I am not a fan of C.S. Lewis. I cited him because I thought you and Indy might be.
You missed the point. Your methodology is the issue.
__________________
太初有道
ChinoCoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 06:54 PM   #13
creekster
Senior Member
 
creekster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
creekster is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleUte View Post
As I understand philosophers traditionally equate evil with suffering and this is particularly so with respect to "the problem of evil." I was more dismissive of the problem of evil when I was younger. But with experience and maturity it has become more of a problem for me, I confess.
But if one takes a deistic view, is the suffering evil? Is the objection that if God asllows or causes suffering he can't be all good?
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos.
creekster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 07:02 PM   #14
SeattleUte
 
SeattleUte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
SeattleUte has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by creekster View Post
But if one takes a deistic view, is the suffering evil? Is the objection that if God asllows or causes suffering he can't be all good?
The article goes on to say that the problem of evil and hence Darwinism is not a problem for Deism. Deism is not the type of worship described in the quote.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be.

—Paul Auster
SeattleUte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 07:09 PM   #15
SteelBlue
Senior Member
 
SteelBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Norcal
Posts: 5,821
SteelBlue is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Indy Coug View Post
I don't bother reading CS Lewis because I get enough excerpts at General Conference as it is.
Now that was funny.
SteelBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 07:25 PM   #16
SeattleUte
 
SeattleUte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
SeattleUte has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChinoCoug View Post
You missed the point. Your methodology is the issue.
LOL. A bom apologist lecturing me about "methodology." The old big word dropping tactic. Personally, I don't know if religious people are more immoral than non-religious people. I have read studies that say the answer is at best inconclusive, and much depends on how you categorize Stalin and Hitler, as practicing secularism or a type of dogma and hence religion. I was simply resonding to Indy's clear insinuation that atheists used natural selection as a rationale to disclaim God with an ulterior motive, and citing a famously religious person (apparenlty often quoted in GC) to make the point that the case is not at all open and shut in favor of religious people. I simply employed a common rhetorical device, and unlike your FARMSy friends have never engaged in a pretense of being scientific or systematic.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be.

—Paul Auster

Last edited by SeattleUte; 08-07-2007 at 07:42 PM.
SeattleUte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 07:36 PM   #17
ChinoCoug
Senior Member
 
ChinoCoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 3,005
ChinoCoug is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleUte View Post
LOL. A bom apologist lecturing me about "methodology." The old big word dropping tactic. Personally, I don't know if religious people are more immoral than non-religious people. I have read studies that say the answer is at best inconclusive, and much depends on how you categorize Stalin and Hitler, as practicing secularism or a type of dogma and hence religion. I was simply resonding to Indy's clear insinuation that atheists used natural selection as a rationale to disclaim God with an ulterior motive, and citing a famously religious person (apparenlty often quoted in GC) to make the point that the case is not at all open and shut in favor of religious people. I simply employed a common rhetorical device, and unly your FARMSy friends have never engaged in a pretense of being scientific or systematic.
You haven't answered by question. What discipline are you trained in? I have a degree in economics and I'm trained in quantitative methods. Not a warm-fuzzy liberal arts guy. And I spotted endogeneity in your use of evidence. Your CS Lewis paraphrase does nothing to support your claim.

If "endogeneity" is too big of a word for you, let me illustrate with an example.

"Because high-crime areas have more cops on the street, cops cause crime to go up."
__________________
太初有道
ChinoCoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 07:39 PM   #18
SeattleUte
 
SeattleUte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
SeattleUte has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChinoCoug View Post
You haven't answered by question. What discipline are you trained in? I have a degree in economics and I'm trained in quantitative methods. Not a warm-fuzzy liberal arts guy. And I spotted endogeneity in your use of evidence. Your CS Lewis paraphrase does nothing to support your claim.

If "endogeneity" is too big of a word for you, let me illustrate with an example.

"Because high-crime areas have more cops on the street, cops cause crime to go up."
I'm a lawyer.

If you think economics is not a "warm and fuzzy" type of thing you are sadly deluded. It's social science, which, as I'm sure the real scientists here will verify, is not science at all. Moreover, you probably only got a BS in it. I minored in econ, so there.

In any event, between you and me there is only one of us who comes here pretending to be something he is not.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be.

—Paul Auster
SeattleUte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 07:51 PM   #19
ChinoCoug
Senior Member
 
ChinoCoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 3,005
ChinoCoug is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleUte View Post
I'm a lawyer.

If you think economics is not a "warm and fuzzy" type of thing you are sadly deluded. It's social science, which, as I'm sure the real scientists here will verify, is not science at all. Moreover, you probably only got a BS in it. I minored in econ, so there.
At the U, one of the only two Marxist departments in the country. The stuff they teach you is not mainstream. You still won't know anything about modern economic theory.

I currently only have a bachelor's, but I've taken graduate-level methodology courses. I know enough to read and understand empirical literature.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleUte View Post
In any event, between you and me there is only one of us who comes here pretending to be something he is not.
I agree.
__________________
太初有道
ChinoCoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 08:35 PM   #20
All-American
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,420
All-American is an unknown quantity at this point
Send a message via MSN to All-American
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeattleUte View Post
LOL. A bom apologist lecturing me about "methodology." The old big word dropping tactic. Personally, I don't know if religious people are more immoral than non-religious people. I have read studies that say the answer is at best inconclusive, and much depends on how you categorize Stalin and Hitler, as practicing secularism or a type of dogma and hence religion. I was simply resonding to Indy's clear insinuation that atheists used natural selection as a rationale to disclaim God with an ulterior motive, and citing a famously religious person (apparenlty often quoted in GC) to make the point that the case is not at all open and shut in favor of religious people. I simply employed a common rhetorical device, and unlike your FARMSy friends have never engaged in a pretense of being scientific or systematic.
And here is his methodology. "You believe in the book of Mormon, ergo, your statements are not credible. Hitler and Stalin had religions, too, after all."
__________________
εν αρχη ην ο λογος
All-American is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.