Home| Letters| Links| RSS| About Us| Contact Us

On the Frontline

What's New

Table of Contents

Index of Authors

Index of Titles

Index of Letters

Mailing List


subscribe to our mailing list:



SECTIONS

Critique of Intelligent Design

Evolution vs. Creationism

The Art of ID Stuntmen

Faith vs Reason

Anthropic Principle

Autopsy of the Bible code

Science and Religion

Historical Notes

Counter-Apologetics

Serious Notions with a Smile

Miscellaneous

Letter Serial Correlation

Mark Perakh's Web Site

Discussion

You can read and reply to the existing discussion threads related to the article, or create a new thread:

Your name *:
Your email *:
Security question *: 19 + 6 =
Related article(s):
Subject *:
Message *:
     Length: (max.: 3000 characters)

 

Title Author Date
Your review of Barr Frank, Mark May 30, 2007
Thank you for this interesting and perceptive review. There is a related question I would really like to see you write about as it requires a deep understanding of physics to be convincing.

"What does materialism mean?" or perhaps more accurately "How can we interpret statements that deny materialism?"

I find the distinction between materialism and non-materialism quite unclear. Science continues to deduce the existence of more and more phenomena that are fundamentally unobservable and have properties that are increasingly peculiar to the layman - from electromagnetic radiation through quarks and singularities. Yet all of these phenomena would be accepted by the most hardline atheist/materialist. (I suspect that cosmology even deals with concepts that are outside time and space - but my expertise is not up to that.) Where are the boundaries of the material which the non-material is outside?

Suppose we find a clear message written in the stars saying "I am your God and to prove it I will make all the stars vanish for 24 hours" this then happens. Does this prove the existence of non-materialism? Or does it just drastically expand the scope of science?

Anyhow I am sure you could write about this very well and I, for one, would find it fascinating.

Mark Frank