Re: Cobb County

You insult me personally like a spoiled child whose legos just got taken
away, and you accuse me of an emotional response! I see it is
appropriate for you to paint all lawyers with your broad brush and be
pejoratively insulting to us, but it improper for anyone to make any
observations about science. I am beginning to think there is much less
of Christ and much more of parochialism on this list. You seem more
interested in making personal insults and pigeon holing others instead
of having an honest conversation with a Christian brother.

D. F. Siemens, Jr. wrote:

> Sorry, Ed, but your emotional response is beside the point. I
> challenge anyone with a background in elementary modern logic to get
> out /Words and Phrases/, a standard reference work for lawyers, and to
> look up the logical connectives, and, and/or, or, if, if and only if,
> and not to be appalled at what lawyers and judges have made of them.
> Lawyers are trained to persuade. They are not witnesses, required to
> tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. This is
> clearly the situation with Johnson, who insists that there is only one
> kind of naturalism. This is false, but it's required for his case.
>
> And no, I did not "in some illogical and backhanded way " call you a
> liar. I made a general observation, something that applies
> universally. I recognize that there are those who misrepresent facts
> because they don't know any better. I recall a dear soul who believed
> that there was a golden hen with golden chicks that fed on the bits of
> gold in the sands of the river. My wife heard a mother declare,
> apropos of intestinal parasites, "I don't believe in worms." There are
> even cases of invincible ignorance, those who will (perhaps must)
> hold a view in spite of total evidence to the contrary. My son was in
> China on business. In one of the later cities visited, a native told
> him that their tea was the best. "But the tea in X tastes better," he
> replied. "Yes, that's true, but everyone knows that our tea is the
> best." There are others who deliberately twist facts. I recently
> encountered salesmen who twisted some information and made up other
> claims to make a sale more profitable to them. My observation applies
> to all, innocent to guilty.
> Dave
>
> On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:20:03 -0800 Edward Hassertt <ehassertt@mac.com
> <mailto:ehassertt@mac.com>> writes:
>
> D. F. Siemens, Jr. wrote:
>
>> Edward J. Hassertt wrote in part
>> So, if God did supernaturally acts, then the assumptions of
>> methodological naturalism are false and the foundations on which
>> scientific discoveries are based are nonexistent. If God does or
>> did act in the events of the universe in a supernatural way and
>> science assumes a priori that such actions are not present, then
>> if they are present, science will always miss describing the
>> universe or its history accurately.
>>
>> If we a priori exclude the possibility of discovering
>> supernatural signatures in science, is that really science? How
>> can one claim that certain types of evidence will always be
>> ignored or interpreted to mean something else just because of a
>> presupposition of methodological naturalism?
>>
>>>
>>>
>> This is a typical lawyer approach, distort matters so that the
>> unwary are seduced by nonsense.
>
> And this is typical of children, matching an honest discussion
> with childish insults. Are you capable of an adult conversation
> or is everything you post a bunch of hateful, abusive and
> unChristlike insults?
>
>> The exclusion of supernatural acts is scientism, not science,
>> metaphysical naturalism, not methodological.
>
> Well, if you read the post I was responding too, that is exactly
> what was said.
>
>> This is something every honest scholar recognizes. What
>> scientists qua scientists (for there are dogmatic materialists
>> among them, as among nonscientists) recognize is that they cannot
>> deal with supernatural acts. However, scientists may recognize
>> that God is active in every event. This includes the natural, as
>> was recognized by Luther who spoke of natural laws as the masks
>> of God.
>>
>> Pagans, including Wiccans, could hold a theory whereby the
>> supernatural could be examined scientifically, for they hold that
>> the powers can be controlled by charms, incantations, spells,
>> curses, etc. A true theist, in contrast, cannot scientifically
>> demonstrate the free acts of God. There are some silly preachers
>> who declare that God must return to the giver tenfold (or
>> whatever) everything given to them, and there is the name it
>> claim it gang. But prayer does not control and compel God. It
>> includes supplication and thanksgiving, to be sure. But it should
>> emphasize praise and, most importantly, trust. "God, ya gotta" is
>> not orthodox.
>>
>> There is no "presupposition of methodological naturalism"
>> involved, except in a twisted view. There is a
>> necessary restriction to manipulation of the natural, and that
>> limited. No scientist can turn off gravity or decrease the
>> entropy of a closed system. She has to work within the natural
>> parameters. If she's an atheist, she'll claim that's all there
>> is. A pagan will claim that there are all kinds of spirit powers
>> behind nature. A Christian will quote Colossians 1:17. The
>> scientific observations are the same for all, but the philosophy
>> and theology are different and incompatible.
>>
>> There is a vital principle that I wish were more widely observed:
>> one cannot serve God with a lie. A mistake he will pardon and, I
>> trust, turn to his glory. He knows we are fallible. But repeating
>> a falsehood after it has been corrected makes one an ally of Satan.
>> Dave
>
> Are you in some illogical and backhanded way accusing me of being
> a liar?
>
> --
> .......................................................................................
> The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor
> between classes, nor between political parties either, but right
> through every human heart - Alexander Solzhenitsyn
> .......................................................................................
>
> Edward J. Hassertt
> Reason By Faith
> Auburn, Washington
>
> http://www.reasonbyfaith.org
>
> Christian Legal Discussion:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advocatusdeus/
>
>

-- 
.......................................................................................
The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between 
classes, nor between political parties either, but right through every 
human heart   -  Alexander Solzhenitsyn
.......................................................................................
Edward J. Hassertt
Reason By Faith
Auburn, Washington
http://www.reasonbyfaith.org
Christian Legal Discussion:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advocatusdeus/