Shit... Another theist makes a thread, I see if there is anyway to help with all the responses and it turns out he's arguing against one of my most basic points...
I submit that this
demonstrates just how weak, pathetic, and useless the so called "spiritual paradigm" is, considering that NO TWO PEOPLE agree on any of this crap, yet it is supposed to the THE truth as revealed to ignorant credulous desert wandering goat herders by the almighty ruler of the cosmos. Now I suppose that Dominic isn't necessarily advancing a biblical worldview in this particular thread, but I think it's safe to "assume" that his case is in support of some type of religious worldview.
To be honest, I really get sick of the kind of pointless acrobatics that Dominic is doing here, because he hasn't clarified anything, or provided an explanation for anything, or even told us what the rules of the spiritual paradigm are. In another thread regarding souls he is being similarly stubborn. What it comes down to is this. Rather than demonstrating a single way in which his worldview explains anything, describes anything, has rules, or is useful in any way (he can't do this because his worldview does none of these things) he feels the need to try to discredit the scientific method and what he calls the physical paradigm. "It works, and is the basis of all human knowledge, but so what?" is a pretty lame argument, but one that you would expect from a person whose worldview does not work
. It's really quite silly. It's like saying "We may know, because of science, numerous ways to produce light. But let's forget all of that, even though it works, because it's all based on the assumptions of science, and instead buy a magic wand and practice the Lumos spell. Only then will we understand anything about light". In other words, lets conveniently ignore what works, using a bunch of pseudo logic gymnastics to make it look like we are somehow making a point, and then just try to play the "Well we can never really know" card. Personally, I am going to go with what works. The fact that Dominic is expressing these opinions on the internet, and not channeling this info into our consciousness using some sort of "spiritual" means, seems to demonstrate to me that he does not have much faith in his on worldview, because he has to apply OUR worldview to even get his point across.
Human perception is defined by what we know... and therefore is always changing... If you gave a caveman a match he would see a stick with dirt at the end... The idea of science is to build off the perception we have to change it t a more accurate one.
And this is the exact opposite
of what occurs in religion.
Your consciousness is a very unique thing... It understands logic, which is the most basic law of the universe. So if we perceive things wrong, eventually there will be an observable logical contradiction. So to say that our consciousness is to limited is to say that logic might be false...
But that's just what Dominic is trying to do, demonstrate that the "assumptions" of science are dubious, even though the shit somehow still works! If one made all of the wrong assumptions, and tested a theory based on those assumptions, and the theory works, every time, without fail, which is more likely, that the assumptions are false, but the results are entirely consistent and prove what was predicted, or that the theory works because the "assumptions" are true? Anyone who would choose the first option would believe in a universe that functions properly and consistently by complete accident, in defiance of all possible odds. It's the same as saying that cars are a functional miracle, because the theory engineers use to design them are just "assumptions". Sure, thousands of different parts put together in the correct way produces a machine that we can use to travel about at considerable speeds, and has worked for over a hundred years, but it's just an "assumption" that the theory behind automobiles works. HOW CAN ANY THINKING PERSON TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY?!?
And Dominic still hasn't told us what the assumptions of the spiritual paradigm are, or what to do with them. He can't explain it, it does nothing useful at all, predicts/explains nothing, answers not one question about our universe, and so naturally he has to dismiss the theory that actually works
, because it allows him to ignore the glaring flaws in his own. He has to say that because he has nothing else to go on.
Sorry, given two competing explanations for the universe, I'm going to "assume" that the one that actually effing works
is the one that is true. Until Dominic sends me an instant message using the spiritual paradigm, I will continue with this "assumption".