Hmmm. I acknowledged poor wording on my part, admitted to not having a command of Buddhist scripture (so no need for guessing on your part) and tried to explain what prompted my poor word choice. If that is not sufficient, so be it. :)
In the context of the conversation where an aspect of Buddhist philosophy was put forth as supporting?, advocating?, describing?, "an evolutionary process" ...
I was offered this in support of the comment:
So, based on that tenuous connection, I was being generous and acknowledging that at...
I completely understand wanting to stay on topic. I just found your comment about "Darwin style" evolution curious. Thanks for taking a little time to induldge my curiosity. :)
But the ToE is very specifically about species and whether and how they may change over time.
Given what you have provided, my take on it would be that the scientific ToE does not conflict with, or is at least compatible with Buddhist philosophy. But in evaluating whether Buddhist philosophy...
You may see that as relating to ideas of transmuting or evolving species and thus a valid precursor to the Theory of Evolution, but I, personally, find it a stretch.
Correct in that the idea of transmutation or evolution of species did not originate with Darwin. However, Darwin had developed a thesis or theory that provided a valid mechanism to explain how change in species occurred in the form of natural selection (concurrently with Alfred Russel Wallace)...
I'm not an evolutionary biologist but it is my assumption that no biologist today consider Darwin's contribution the final word regarding the Theory of Evolution. ToE is no longer Darwin's theory as it has developed well beyond his work. That is why it makes no sense to refer to Darwin when...
To evolve means to develop or change gradually over time. Evolving processes do not necessarily require an artist or creator. A cumulonimbus cloud does not appear instantly in the sky but evolves and grows over some period of time given the propper conditions, no artist required.
I'm not a scientist either. However, I find your following comment facinating given your examination of the ToE.
I am curious as to why, when speaking of Evolution, you add the qualifier "Darwinian style"? Are you only considering the ToE as presented in Darwin's book On the Origin of...
In thinking about the terms "patriotism" and "nationalism", which have both been referenced in the thread, I think both reflect the same core values of love of and loyalty to a country or nation. I think both allow for negative attitudes towards "others".
To my mind, patriotism connotes doing...
Indeed. Well, I suppose in the later case, there is no mystery. Not necessarily a box of their own design, but one that they have been inculcated in, in regards to organized, long-standing religions.
It seems we are in agreement then that an atheistic position isn't inherently irrational.
As to your reference to "science idolatry", I must confess I do not know what that is. If you are simply saying, in a tongue-in-cheek way, that we must hold scientific inquiry to rigorous standards and...
Describing atheism as irrational seems extreme in my view.
Assuming a creator doesn't really solve the problem of understanding the origins of existence and reality, does it. Assigning a creator beggs the question from whence comes the creator, and honestly we would have to open that up to...