[MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?)

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting Case <Case at iSpots.com>:

> > [Case]
> > The fact that life is a product of inorganic processes is just too well
> > established to even argue about. You need to just get used to that or get
> > used having people looking at you funny when you burst out like that.
> > "...takes the livingness of life away..." that's fucking funny.
> 
> [Platt]
> What "inorganic processes" are you referring to? The one's scientists
> haven't been able to duplicate perhaps? Or the ones you know must exist as a
> matter of faith?
> 
> [Case]
> I was using "inorganic" is the artificial and incorrect usage assigned to it
> in the MoQ. That is, non-biological. If you want to insist on a proper
> definition of inorganic as non-carbon based processes I will happily
> rephrase my statements. The processes I refer to are ones that scientists
> understand and manipulate and reproduce all of the time. 
> 
> I have stated many, many items that I have faith in what they are doing.

The "they" in the final sentence above needs a referent. Does it refer to
"processes" or "scientists." As for Pirsig's error and carbon vs. non-carbon
processes at the inorganic level, I'm confused. Are you suggesting
that any process involving carbon is organic? 

Thanks.


-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/