Posted on 06/30/2008 4:41:23 PM PDT by Kevmo
The crevo threads typically degenerate into name calling. Recently, the Religion Moderator declared that "science is not religion", and did not publish the criteria for such consideration. My suggestion to the evolutionist community has been to acknowledge that Scientism is a religion and start to utilize the protections offered under the religion tags that are different than other threads (due to the intensity of feelings over religious issues). So this thread is intended to be an ECUMENICAL thread under the tag of SCIENTISM. The intent is to keep discussion civil.
I would like to see a straightforward discussion over the topic of whether scientism should be treated as a religion on FR. I'll try to find the links to the adminlecture series about what the ground rules are on ecumenical threads, and I'll copy some recent interactions that show the need for scientism to be treated as a religion on FR.
That it seems like a reasonable offer to you is exactly what's wrong.
They already have them, but you won't accept them. They either have to profess a religion according to what you say it should be, or they will continue to be attacked. Those are your terms.
Exactly what is wrong with them having the right to profess their own religious beliefs?
There is nothing wrong with it. You're demanding that they give up that right, and let you profess their religious beliefs for them, in exchange for "peace".
They already have them, but you won’t accept them.
***Then what is the name of their chosen religion?
Ask them. Each one, individually. I cannot speak for them, and neither can you.
You’re demanding that they give up that right, and let you profess their religious beliefs for them, in exchange for “peace”.
***Your post said nothing of the sort. And, you’re wrong about this particular item as well. That’s an oblique writing style you have, to say the least.
If they agree to restrict their postings to ecumenical threads labeled "Scientism", and implicitly accept your assesment of their religious beliefs, and give up the right to profess their own you will leave them alone. Those are your terms.
Kevmo: Then what is the name of their chosen religion?
TLogic: Ask them. Each one, individually. I cannot speak for them, and neither can you.
***Yet you presume to speak for them in post #222 when you say, “They already have them, but you won’t accept them.” Again with the extremely oblique writing style. Neither of us have an intention nor the capability of asking each one, individually, so your post is basically nonsense.
Very well, I'll speak for any of them that don't describe their religion as "Scientism". That's the only one you'll accept, in exchange for "peace".
If they agree to restrict their postings to ecumenical threads labeled “Scientism”, and implicitly accept your assesment of their religious beliefs, and give up the right to profess their own
***Why would they give up the right to profess their own? What does my assessment of their religious beliefs have to do with ANYTHING? Why would they restrict their postings to ecumenical threads? They can stay on open threads all they want, but when they whine about religious zealots on crevo threads they’re stuck with what they have.
you will leave them alone. Those are your terms.
***It’s not me that would leave them alone, it is all the religious zealots that the evolutionists claim they seek protection from. Those are the Religion Moderator’s terms, not mine.
In this instance, everything. It is the basis of the entire proposal.
Very well, I’ll speak for any of them that don’t describe their religion as “Scientism”. That’s the only one you’ll accept, in exchange for “peace”.
***There’s also evolutionism/humanism/whateveritism/scientismism and/or fill_in_the_blank_ism. They can describe it however they want, and it is up to the religious mod to accept or not accept it as a tag. You seem to have a reading comprehension problem.
No Catholcism, Protestantism, Christianity? Why aren't those on the list? They can't have those religious beliefs?
Kevmo: Why would they give up the right to profess their own? What does my assessment of their religious beliefs have to do with ANYTHING?
TLogic: In this instance, everything. It is the basis of the entire proposal.
***In this instance, I’m done with you on this thread. I’ve seen these kind of tactics before and they are wholly unfit for ecumenical threads. You may have the last word.
“What is reality, anyway?” ~ TigersEye
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
The Absolute Science of the Center and the Darwinist Religion of the Periphery
Science deals with the periphery of the world, while religion deals with the center. Being that both the periphery and center necessarily exist and co-arise, science and religion are obviously both necessary to each other — at least if one wishes to have an account of reality that is both consistent and complete, AKA, if one wishes to live in the Real world. However, one would think that it would be self-evident that the center could never be derived from the periphery, any more than the Absolute could be derived from the relative, the whole from the part, the inside from the outside, eternity from time, or intelligence from matter.
And all of these categories are reflections of each other: center, interior, whole, intelligence, eternity, absolute. They can be combined in various ways to disclose other categories; for example ...” ~ Gagdad Bob
http://onecosmos.blogspot.com/2008/06/science-of-center-and-religion-of.html
Those tags already exist.
Once again I feel compelled to conclude that you have a reading problem, but that would necessitate further postings from you and I’m not all that interested. The last few postings from you have had zero value for the content of this thread. Feel free to have the last word here as well.
You’re as transparent as vacuum.
But nevermind. Kevmo apparently wants them to admit that they are not actually Christians, but ‘Scientism-ists’ or some such.
***Not true. It’s a straw argument. I had asked you to leave this thread about 50 posts ago.
To all Lurkers: I have my doubts about the ability of evolutionists to hold their tongues on ecumenical threads. This thread is an example of how mean-spirited they can be when they are required to be POLITE. Much of the blame for the vitriol lies in the camp of evolutionists, and a quick jaunt over to Darwin Central will prove that to be the case.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.