Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.6.2.17 $; site uicsl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uicsl!rmooney From: rmooney@uicsl.UUCP Newsgroups: net.origins Subject: Re: creationism topics Message-ID: <27700005@uicsl.UUCP> Date: Thu, 11-Oct-84 15:28:00 EDT Article-I.D.: uicsl.27700005 Posted: Thu Oct 11 15:28:00 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 13-Oct-84 07:08:05 EDT References: <32500003@uiucdcsb.UUCP> Lines: 39 Nf-ID: #R:uiucdcsb:32500003:uicsl:27700005:000:1853 Nf-From: uicsl!rmooney Oct 11 14:28:00 1984 >> > My original statement: >> > Creationists seem to think that since scientists need to postulate at least >> > the initial existence of matter, then they are just as free to postulate the >> > initial existence of God. >> Mike Ward: >> But scientists have no need to postulate the initial existence >> of matter. They only need to postulate the existence of matter >> at a certain point in time, and can very easily state that events >> before that time, being unobservable, are beyond the realm of >> science. (and quite possibly in the realm of religion) >> What that point in time is, of course, depends on the current >> state of mankind's ability to observe. >Larry Bickford: >So evolutionists can have things "beyond the realm of science" but >creationists can't? That's hypocritical cheating! Obviously, any system must be based eventually on certain assumptions. Every logical system requires a set of axioms. I see little practlcal difference between supposing matter has always existed and saying it was created at one time and we are eternally ignorant of anything before that. As I initially stated, the important thing is to "minimize the complexity" of any assumptions. Creationists violate this by immediately resorting to another unobservable realm to explain origins instead of first exhausting all possible natural (and therefor simpler) explanations. Even if one considers the supposition of the existence of matter and the supposition of an initial cause in a chain of cause and effect part of "evolution" (a term which creationists interpret as any natural explanation for the origins of anything), it is not at all hypocritical to deride creationism since their suppositions involve a more complicated ontology. Ray Mooney ihnp4!uiucdcs!uicsl!rmooney University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign