Oh yes Dennett. He is one of my favourites. If he lived around here I would ask him over for tea.

(not.)

Is it dubious or false simply because kenneth believes it is dubious and false? How can the origin of the process of evolution be unknown and yet somehow you know? How can you know what is unknown?

I am sorry you think that people you disagree with cannot write things worth reading. That is too bad. Do you talk only with people who think as you do? Called "confirmation bias" in some circles.

Well I spend a lot of time talking to you, which is kind of counter-factual for that proposal, I would have thought.

And, for the record, I can't stand Dennett, I think he is an intellectual pygmy who only gets attention because of the nature of the times we live in. In a generation nobody will remember the name.

They are attempting to impose a censorship upon discussion of metaphysical issues. They are not recognizable as philosophers, they are ideologues. Reason with them only goes so far; they substitute reasonable argumentation with prejudice and enforce their prejudices by any means necessary.

If you read more closely (your mistake earlier), you would know no one here has said they knew the cause of evolution.

You are looking for a fight my friend, and you're consistently finding one because you misinterpret posts. It isn't your metaphysical beliefs that instigate others to be rude, let that be known.

They are attempting to impose a censorship upon discussion of metaphysical issues. They are not recognizable as philosophers, they are ideologues. Reason with them only goes so far; they substitute reasonable argumentation with prejudice and enforce their prejudices by any means necessary.

Who?..........................

No one has really been rude to me except for you and you have been consistently rude to me in other threads as well as others.

Please tell me specifically what I have misinterpreted.

Is it a reasonable argument to make to say that idea and mind are related to the unknown origin of human evolution?

Is it a reasonable argument to make to say that idea and mind are related to the unknown origin of human evolution?

I told you what you needed to hear, the truth. Perhaps I could have worded it nicer, you're right. I'm sorry for being rude.

---------- Post added 03-04-2010 at 08:01 PM ----------



If he says "no", he is "imposing a censorship", and "enforcing his prejudices"? Not rude - these are things you typed, my friend. And I think it is pretty clear you were referring to kennethamy and I (if not, please explain).

One one side, we have: mind is solely a product of the brain, which is solely the product of an evolutionary process, which is basically material in nature.

On the other side we have: Mind is somehow immanent in nature, and is a creative force which in some respect determines the outcome of evolution, rather than just being a product of evolution. This is not a 'creationist' or 'fundamentalist religious' view, but is more like the view of the Greek philosophers, such as Plotinus, who was quoted above.

Can we debate that?

It is not an argument at all, so it is not a reasonable argument? The statement you just wrote is far too vague for a reply. What does "related" mean?

You must make the distinction here. I did not say that mind or idea are involved in the process of evolution.

I think you need to clarify what you mean by your original question.

You said:
"'mind' or 'idea' are involved in the coming to be of the evolutionary process."

Do you mean by this that a superpowerful being with a mind planned the process of evolution?

Or do you mean that this mind directly caused physical changes so that the process of evolution began?

Or doe you mean something else? And what is this something else you mean?

You need to furnish us with the full quote. I am not stating that 'mind' or 'idea' are involved in the origin of the evolutionary process. I am asking whether such a question is a reasonable or unreasonable one to make.


I am asking is such a question reasonable or not. I am not asserting for the moment that that is the case.

-

IWould it be reasonable to say some variety of intelligence can be ascribed to your 'natural laws'?

--