Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: jennyp
You're creating straw dogs here. Nowhere did I speak of "will" of atoms, etc. Not sure where you are getting that. AND... they operate according to orderly principles. Things in the universe operate in a predictable manner - to the extent we understand these principles. There is no point in pursing that point of argumentation further except to highlight your words "what's built into it by nature in the first place."

Even our ability to make such distinctions as "order" and "chaos" bolsters the point of some idea of order and chaos. What we see as "chaos" is merely many items behaving according to said principles (i.e. what you've stated is "built into it by nature") in too great a volume or in too complex a path for our finite minds to process.

583 posted on 08/21/2006 4:25:51 PM PDT by Lexinom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 575 | View Replies ]


To: Lexinom
The problem is that you're constructing philosophical arguments to refute scientific theories. Quantum mechanics did not become false because causality was betrayed or that it refuted the Cosmological Argument. You have to refute scientific theories on a scientific basis. Philosophical propositions and premises do not lend credence in arguments against science.
585 posted on 08/21/2006 4:30:46 PM PDT by Dante Alighieri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 583 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson