Originally Posted by
geoff332
I started a reply, but see no point in finishing it. You have mis-read pretty much all of what I wrote. I see no point in trying to explain it again. I'll list the errors and part with two final comments.
1. I said that the fundamental principals of religion and science were not in conflict. You interpreted this to mean that I was claiming there was never a conflict between religion and science.
2. You accused me of making assumptions about other people - assumptions I did not make.
3. You said I was taking you literally - when I wasn't referring to you at all. Twice.
4. When I was referring to you, you changed your mind.
5. I said "knowledge is fundamentalism", not that "knowledge is fundamental". It's a big difference and confusing the two is not a mistake I'd make.
You have this idea of a harmonious reconciliation stuck in your head and you dogmatically refuse to hear any alternatives. If that's what you want to do, then that's fine me, but I have no interest in posting so that my words can be twisted to suit your ends. That's disrespectful and a little annoying. And, yes, I used the word dogmatically deliberately.
Secondly, if the approach to twisting everything to suit your presupposed position - which is precisely what you have done in that last post - is your idea of an open mind, then I'd rather keep mine closed. My idea of an open mind is very, very different.
Bookmarks