Yet it still requires an act of faith to attribute any given stone that appears to be an arrowhead to a human creator. Nature can achieve the same result in many different ways. Paul On Oct 26, 2006, at 4:54 PM, John Francis wrote:
> > The arrowhead is attributed to a human creator precisely because > we *do* understand how that creation process took place - an argument > based on knowledge, not on ignorance. It's nothing to do with > perceived attributes, and everything to do with understanding. > > > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 01:41:18PM -0600, Tom C wrote: >> No - I see it has attributes that indicate it has a maker or >> designer. A >> roughly symmetrical chipped piece of flint lying on the ground is >> believed >> to be an arrowhead. We don't see the aboriginal that crafted the >> arrowhead >> yet we believe the event occurred. We don't see the designer of our >> physical universe, far more complex, and since we can't see one, >> we believe >> one does not exist. >> >> That doesn't manifest ignorance? >> >> >> Tom C. >> >>> That is astonishing. I'm an atheist but it's difficult to look at >> that >>> photo and not perceive a creator. >>> >> >> Ah, the Argument from Personal Ignorance - "I don't know how that >> came >> to be, therefore God made it". >> >> Bob >> >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
