Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
I Don't Think It Is As Necessary As A Few Of You Think

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Harvey on March 29, 2002 05:11:56 UTC

Paul,

Why stop at defining God? Why not define words like 'exist', 'prove', 'definition', etc. At some point in our effort to define words we totally lose the central meaning of a question which I think is rather obvious. By over defining ourselves we make a simple question require all of us to have a Ph.D. in semantics, linguistics, and etymology.

I think the word 'prove' is the most controversial since most people vary more on their understanding of that term than on the existence (ontology) of God (intelligent-like spiritual existence that created the material universe and pervades the universe). I guess my point is that we can always push for definitions until we are blue in the face, but let's don't look away from what we generally mean by God.

For example, I think it was Steven Weinberg who said that he had no idea what the term 'spiritual' meant. That strikes me as nothing short of obtuse. Sometimes we should just let our yea be yea and our nay be nay.

Warm regards, Harv

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2020 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins