Is It Good To Redefine Controversial Words? - an Astronomy Net God & Science Forum Message

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


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

Is It Good To Redefine Controversial Words?

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by John Morgan Powell on March 6, 2001 21:12:37 UTC

Perhaps I am beginning to understand.

Since you don't believe there exists "truth" in the usual sense of being outside our opinions and unchangeable and so it's not a useful definition, you've decided to redefine the word to serve a useful purpose, to refer to something which does exist.

To me that would be like redefining "God" to mean "The Laws of Nature" because the definition most people use for God refers to a non-existent idea. I'm not sure that's a good idea unless your purpose is to be able to claim to believe in "God" even though you're an atheist.

Follow Ups:

Re: Is it good to redefine controversial words? - doctordick - March 6, 2001 - 22:46 UTC
- Nature or God? - alexander - March 7, 2001 - 18:48 UTC
  - Re: Nature or God? - yanniru - March 8, 2001 - 18:16 UTC
    - Re: Re: Nature or God? - alexander - March 9, 2001 - 19:29 UTC
    - Incomplete link. - alexander - March 12, 2001 - 16:13 UTC
- Publish your ideas. - johnpowell - March 8, 2001 - 23:24 UTC

Additional Information

About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy

Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 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