From: Case (Case@iSpots.com)
Date: Mon Nov 28 2005 - 13:46:56 GMT
[Poot]
Thats a very good point case. I think that the meaning of words can bungle
things up a lot.
The issue of "miraculous creation" (something from nothing) also brings an
issue to surface, of what I was concerned with.
Did the inorganic exhibit any form of purpose? This is why I'm wondering if
we can call evolutionary forces (DQ-SQ interaction) purpose , for the sake
of this discussion.
what do you think?
[Case]
I don't find much use for the term purpose in this context. Whose purpose?
What is this purpose? How do we get to know about this purpose? How does
this purpose relate to purposes of our own making?
How is saying that hydrogen atoms desire close company to one another more
meaningful than saying they respond to gravitational attraction. If we are
reducing purpose to this level then it more akin to laws of physics. But
using the term purpose in this way makes it easy to drift into saying that
hydrogen atoms congregate they want to become stars.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Nov 28 2005 - 17:30:08 GMT