Evolution,

" jesus just thought he was a god."

Thinking himself divine, perhaps JC might have a go at my prime question, and, explain his non-terrestrial existence to us. Moreover, if he is god, he should be able to overcome OLO write limits. Now that's power!

If memory serves the "think method" worked well for the students and parents of the Music Man: Hmmm.. Seventy-six St.Pauls led the Ash parade, with 110 St. Pete's close behind, they were followed by rows and rows of the finest virgins seen, the cream of ever Jewish clan...

Peace.

Freediver,

1. Have you changed you position of Popper & Kuhn regarding evolution?

2. Please explain the existence of god.

Oliver. He wont answer you. But his kun-fo, is strong.

Freediver, Boaz and Sells,

- Can you expplain the existence of God?

Evolution,

I will try again:

I wish some very established posters would not just hit and run. If their auguments are sound, why not debate me and defeat me, and, my kindren

Bugsy:

"...certain (limited) aspects of evolutionary historicism do not appear to be scientific.... But it does not follow that the theory of evolution as whole is uncientific.

The term natural selection encompasses every aprt of evolution which is scientific. Evolution differs from natural selection in that it includes the unscientific bits. What differentiates evolution from natural selection is that evolution is not scientific. Saying that it is unscientific does not mean that natural selection is unscientific, but saying that it is scientific would imply that the 'historicisms' are scientific. Likewise, if ID incorporates natural selection, that is not sufficient to claim that ID is a scientific theory, but saying it is unscientific does not imply that natural selection is unscientific.

"Your 'common knowledge' and what you think is the theory of evolution.....

The difference between natural selection and evolution is reasonably well understood by both the general public and the broader scientific community and neatly captures the difference between scientific and unscientific theories.

"....you would not merely be accused of laziness. Trust me on this.

Well then, who would they claim that I have copied?

"The Theory of Evolution shall remain safe and well in face of such blistering critique.

You miss the point entirely. This is not a criticism of the theory of evolution. Theemotional baggage carried into it by staunch evolutionists does however make it difficult to conduct a rational debate on the issue.

Oliver:

"Does your conclusion compare one or many theories with "the world"?

My conclusion is not a scientific one. This is a philosophical question.

re: Kuhn quoted in *Nickles, you cannot make an evolutionary tree of ideas, due to the extent of 'cross pollination'.

"Clearly Kuhn believes in evolution to use it as a metaphor in his discourse.

Evolution can be a convenient metaphor for may things, but that is not really the issue here.

Oliver I would gladly debate your tangential issues if it weren't for this absurd post limiter. You are welcome to bring it up on OzPolitic if you want a less restrained debate.

Freediver,

[1]

"Does your conclusion compare one or many theories with "the world"?
- Oliver

"My conclusion is not a scientific one. This is a philosophical question." - Freediver

- Beyond science, I think Kuhn's proposition could be extended to say it is dangerous to just link A with B, stop.

- What is your philosophical question in three or four sentences, please?

[2]

"Clearly Kuhn believes in evolution to use it as a metaphor in his discourse." - Oliver

"Evolution can be a convenient metaphor for may things, but that is not really the issue here." - Freediver

- I thought it was an issue. Other posters and I took it you believed that (a) Popper & Kuhn had convergent approaches and (b) Popper and Kuhn did not believe in evolution. I think the correct propositions have now been stated.

[3]

- I enjoy the anonymity of OLO. I write curricula internationally and would not like my views picked-up in a Google search by someone in Asia or the Middle East. Thanks for the invite, just the same.

[4]

- How do you explain the existence of God?

Oliver: << I wish some very established posters would not just hit and run. If their auguments are sound, why not debate me and defeat me, and, my kindren >>

Too true. If it's not that it's elaborate sophistry designed to draw attention to its author.

Boring.