arndt@lymph.DEC (05/05/85)
Reply to Ken Perlow. Science without the 'why' is NOT SCIENCE. It's fiddling around. It's noise. It's killing time till it's time to die. Rosen and I together! Ha. I love it. Truth is, I actually think I'd like the guy if I ever met him, what with us both being from NJ and all. Science DOES start with a 'why'. Even if it's only 'Why bother?'. "Dogmatic", sure sure. Like everyone who has a point of view . . . yawn. Science rests on certain 'why' assumptions that are not what YOU call 'science'. Creationism is not 'science' to you because you have chosen different 'whys' to start with, that's all. I don't find the 'how' stuff boring. Only when it has no 'why' to give it meaning! Then it becomes EXTREEMLY boring. Rather be surfing, you know. Where do you hear anything about God? Tests and stuff? SCIENCE is a METHOD not an answer! You heartless soulless wretch. Ha The ANSWERS depend upon which 'why' you have chosen going in. But I'm not telling you anything you don't know. Hua asks me to defind Creator after I have defined it about three times on the net. The Ground of Being. I choose (because it makes the most sense to me - not from 'authority' or angst - after having considered the alternatives) to believe in a God who created the whole bannana. Me included. It's late but I'll tell you I have some other ideas on the subject. Don't go away now, will ya. Science! Geee. What a short sheet job that is to try and live by. But you little buddy. You're not far from the Kingdom, I feel. Just stay out of the clutches of the Mormons and JW's and such. Until I get a chance to beat you over the head. We're way past Galieo now. By the way, he was a Christian as you know if you have read his private papers. Today we say, "Nevertheless, it moves, I think, maybe, possibly, or not." Welcome to the Dark Ages, Modern version. Life is lived on a bannana peel. And we sing about it. Really got to go. Just in to work to set up a training course for Monday. Mommy and the kids need me at home. Keep chargin' Ken Arndt
ward@hao.UUCP (Mike Ward) (05/06/85)
> Hua asks me to defind Creator after I have defined it about three times > on the net. The Ground of Being. I hope Ken doesn't think he has now defined the creator four times. I mean I hope he doesn't think that "Ground of Being" is a definition. When I took philosophy classes, we took pains to make definitions mean something. "Ground of Being" doesn't mean anything, unless you already know what it means (which I don't). C'mon Ken, let's have a real definition. P.S. Earnest Hua's first name shows up in every message header I get, and he explained the "keebler" thing in response to Paul DuBois.