I received an e-mail from a Christian friend of mine. It basically depicts a short dialogue between student, claimed to be Albert Einstein, and an atheist professor. It used this particular style/form which lead me to, upon reading it for the first, almost accept it as a legitimate argument. It was interesting to me when I thought about how they may have chosen that particular style of writing in order to best communicate their message, however deluded it was. After looking over it again I realized that did several things which I didn't catch the first time. It did things like posit 'heat' as the opposite of 'cold,' 'light' as the opposite as 'darkness,' and 'god' as the opposite of 'evil.' Basically, it involves comparing adjectives with nouns (and proper nouns) in a way that it seems natural to do. When you look at it though, we determine that there are no opposites here. Apart from all of that, good would be the opposite of evil, not God.
24 January 2012
Using Scientific Reason and Dialogue to Promote Religious Reasoning
To start out, the work that the rest of the post is referencing can be found here. - http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/e/einstein-god.htm
I received an e-mail from a Christian friend of mine. It basically depicts a short dialogue between student, claimed to be Albert Einstein, and an atheist professor. It used this particular style/form which lead me to, upon reading it for the first, almost accept it as a legitimate argument. It was interesting to me when I thought about how they may have chosen that particular style of writing in order to best communicate their message, however deluded it was. After looking over it again I realized that did several things which I didn't catch the first time. It did things like posit 'heat' as the opposite of 'cold,' 'light' as the opposite as 'darkness,' and 'god' as the opposite of 'evil.' Basically, it involves comparing adjectives with nouns (and proper nouns) in a way that it seems natural to do. When you look at it though, we determine that there are no opposites here. Apart from all of that, good would be the opposite of evil, not God.
I received an e-mail from a Christian friend of mine. It basically depicts a short dialogue between student, claimed to be Albert Einstein, and an atheist professor. It used this particular style/form which lead me to, upon reading it for the first, almost accept it as a legitimate argument. It was interesting to me when I thought about how they may have chosen that particular style of writing in order to best communicate their message, however deluded it was. After looking over it again I realized that did several things which I didn't catch the first time. It did things like posit 'heat' as the opposite of 'cold,' 'light' as the opposite as 'darkness,' and 'god' as the opposite of 'evil.' Basically, it involves comparing adjectives with nouns (and proper nouns) in a way that it seems natural to do. When you look at it though, we determine that there are no opposites here. Apart from all of that, good would be the opposite of evil, not God.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment