Page 1 of 1

Difference between&essential character of Science&Religion

Posted: Sat Dec 24, 2011 9:16 am
by Pbef
Post removed.

Re: Difference between&essential character of Science&Religion

Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2011 12:56 pm
by Feardorcha
And you wrote this on Christmas Eve?

Re: Difference between&essential character of Science&Religion

Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2011 12:59 pm
by funkyderek
Pbef wrote:I recently saw this headline for an article by Alister McGrath: "Science is about explanation. Religion is about meaning".

I immediately wanted to replace the last sentence with:
'Religion is about "dealing" adaptively (without knowing it) with potentially debilitating sources of fear - mainly but not only 'conditioned-in' such.
You shouldn't. McGrath's formulation at least has clarity, something you've managed to completely remove. Your post may have a point but your writing style is so unintelligible that I was unable to find it. Perhaps you should consider a career as a theologian.

Re: Difference between&essential character of Science&Religion

Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2011 3:36 pm
by DaithiDublin
Pbef wrote:I immediately wanted to replace the last sentence with:
'Religion is about "dealing" adaptively (without knowing it) with potentially debilitating sources of fear - mainly but not only 'conditioned-in' such.

I feel my reformulation of the headline captures fairly well the perspective that is missing from Richard Dawkins' account
You might have captured the perspective, but you certainly didn't transmit it. I have literally no idea what you were trying to say, Pbef. So I read the article by Alister McGrath to see if there was anything in it that might get someone so fired up. But there's nothing new in that article. It could have been written by any Christian apologist.
As funkyderek said, you need to work on your clarity.
Pbef wrote:AEVASIVE loosely - including in a grammatically gooey way - stands for: "Ambiadvantageous[ly]" evolved veritable (or vital) actention {selection serving} system incorporating various "endoopiates".
Man, that's FUBAR!

Re: Difference between&essential character of Science&Religion

Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2011 4:26 pm
by robreynolds2
To be honest this looks like it was written in English, translated to some other landguage with babelfish and then translated back again to English with Google translate.

I work for a Japanese company and translation software often feeds back this kind of garbled nonsense. I strongly suspect this was not the work of the supposed author.


This is what the above text looks like when you do this:-

Way it translates that in Japanese which has BabelFish which is written in Google and English returns to English again and is translated, as for this honestly is visible in translation.

I the software feed back this kind of illegal character nonsense frequently, work the Japanese enterprise and for translating.I am strong, as for this think that it was not the work of the presumed author.


Obviously if the language you choose to translate into is closer to English you will get a better more coherent load of bo!!oX