Search results

  1. S

    Mod+ 269. DR. MICHAEL SHERMER, SKEPTICAL SCIENCE REPORTING

    I wonder, for materialists, what determines 'what is possible' for any given type of matter. Are its inherent properties, its ability to bind with certain other molecules for instance, simply the product of randomness too? The pieces of the universe do fit together suspiciously well. Perhaps, to...
  2. S

    Mod+ 269. DR. MICHAEL SHERMER, SKEPTICAL SCIENCE REPORTING

    Thanks, Typoz, I'll give that Azimov a read.
  3. S

    Mod+ 269. DR. MICHAEL SHERMER, SKEPTICAL SCIENCE REPORTING

    Thanks for your great reply. I'm probably making it plain by this point that I'm not a scientist, and I appreciate your clarifications! One paragraph in particular leapt out at me. You write: "The difference between a rock and a rabbit is that the rock is an amorphous random collection of...
  4. S

    Mod+ 269. DR. MICHAEL SHERMER, SKEPTICAL SCIENCE REPORTING

    Thanks, I think I see it a bit more clearly now. For Dawkins an organic molecule would possess some chance property that enabled its continuence--probably an ability to link into every more complex structures, which eventually started wriggling and striving. But still, a little further down the...
  5. S

    Mod+ 269. DR. MICHAEL SHERMER, SKEPTICAL SCIENCE REPORTING

    I'm quite interested in Dawkins' selfish molecule thought experiment, and the way it was referenced in this interview. It seems to me that it is paradoxical. "Imagine you were a molecule, what would you do to to survive?" Shermer says. It seems to me that, under Dawkins' own materialist...
Back
Top