I don't need to study the sciences any more than I already have to discuss these issues. It is my opinion that the issue discussed in the "argument" that I have contributed to were based on philosophy and religion, both of which I have studied. I have never inserted my opinion on any solely scientific issues, as you should know. I am fully aware of the parameters of my knowledge. In addition, I know that you have discussed evolution, and was merely advocating that that discussion continue.

In addition, you're confusing evolution (as in darwinism, survival of the fittest, etc.) with the dialectical procession of ideas as theorized by Hegel, which is a totally different issue, while still very closely related. As a theory, evolution is valid, and I would probably advocate it if it wasn't for my religious objections. However, I don't have any religious objections to discussion or the theory of the dialectical procession of ideas (which has been contested by several philosophers). I suggest that you get your theories straight before dismissing mine. I hope and trust that this discussion does evolve.

In addition, what's irrational about continuing a conversation that could go far in ending an ideological conflict, or at least changing our perspectives of it.

• I'm not confusing those....biological evolution did the same. - kantolfir2 - July 29, 2002 - 05:09 UTC
  • You're still wrong about my opinion - spartacus - July 30, 2002 - 00:28 UTC
    • Daily, I find new things I make mistakes about! - kantolfir2 - July 30, 2002 - 04:51 UTC
      • Mike man... Ted listen! - emperor__alikar - August 1, 2002 - 02:39 UTC
        • I don't think anyone will drown here...thanks for the note - carefuluniverse - August 1, 2002 - 05:59 UTC
          • Actually I know ted personaly - emperor__alikar - August 3, 2002 - 03:21 UTC
  • Sorry - spartacus - July 30, 2002 - 00:56 UTC