12 Feb '12 09:36>2 edits
Sometimes I really wonder where the regular posters (FMF, twhitehead, RJH, googlefudge, RC, et al) get the time to post in so many threads so often - do they sit in front of their laptop all day?? Or probably stay online with their Blackberry or iPhone! I can't manage more than two threads at a time, three tops.
But only rarely is a thread really interesting enough to folllow. Mainly one gets served up regurgitated drivel on perennial subjects like "6000 years" or "where did life come from?" and NEVER, without exception, is there any value added by the proponents of a controversial view, e.g. YECs. The same tired argument is dished up ad nauseum: "Because that's the way it is, so there! 😏 "Typical example: So just because YOU say it is millions of years, does that mean it's true? 😏
No, that's NOT why it's true, but it's been said for hundreds of times in hundreds of ways, and never properly rebutted, that it becomes b * o * r * i * n * g to repeat it yet one more time!!
To those of you interested in a REAL debate on Spirituality vs Materialism, get the book War of the World Views by Deepak Choprah and a scientist whose name has momentarilly slipped my mind.
(Aside: I read the book over Christmas, but it is lying at home, whilst I am sitting here on my balcony overlooking the Indian Ocean on holiday in Glenmore, on the South Coast of KwaZuluNatal. That's why I will have time, for the next week at least, to follow this thread!😉 But I can get to the book next week, if this thread lasts that long...)
In this book, Deepak gives the case for Spirituality, whilst his very worthy opponent makes the case for Materialism. They take turns so that each writer gets the chance to make a statement first, then the other one rebuts it.
Subjects discussed include the origin of the universe, life, morality, quantum mechanics, and many others.
The book makes fascinating reading. Let me say up front that at the end no one "wins", both keep their own point of view, but it is also safe to say that both sides have a better, and comprehensive, understanding of the opposing point of view, something that can sadly NOT be said of RHP "debates".
My own position is with Deepak, very convincing and eloquent.
So, I was just wondering, has anybody else read this book? What did you think of it??
But only rarely is a thread really interesting enough to folllow. Mainly one gets served up regurgitated drivel on perennial subjects like "6000 years" or "where did life come from?" and NEVER, without exception, is there any value added by the proponents of a controversial view, e.g. YECs. The same tired argument is dished up ad nauseum: "Because that's the way it is, so there! 😏 "Typical example: So just because YOU say it is millions of years, does that mean it's true? 😏
No, that's NOT why it's true, but it's been said for hundreds of times in hundreds of ways, and never properly rebutted, that it becomes b * o * r * i * n * g to repeat it yet one more time!!
To those of you interested in a REAL debate on Spirituality vs Materialism, get the book War of the World Views by Deepak Choprah and a scientist whose name has momentarilly slipped my mind.
(Aside: I read the book over Christmas, but it is lying at home, whilst I am sitting here on my balcony overlooking the Indian Ocean on holiday in Glenmore, on the South Coast of KwaZuluNatal. That's why I will have time, for the next week at least, to follow this thread!😉 But I can get to the book next week, if this thread lasts that long...)
In this book, Deepak gives the case for Spirituality, whilst his very worthy opponent makes the case for Materialism. They take turns so that each writer gets the chance to make a statement first, then the other one rebuts it.
Subjects discussed include the origin of the universe, life, morality, quantum mechanics, and many others.
The book makes fascinating reading. Let me say up front that at the end no one "wins", both keep their own point of view, but it is also safe to say that both sides have a better, and comprehensive, understanding of the opposing point of view, something that can sadly NOT be said of RHP "debates".
My own position is with Deepak, very convincing and eloquent.
So, I was just wondering, has anybody else read this book? What did you think of it??