Skip to main content
6 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Mar 30, 2021 at 21:34 comment added Deschele Schilder You are right about the sir-thing. I mixed Dawkins up with Popper. I don't know why. Maybe, unconsciously, I see that there is no big difference in their thinking. The book you refer to (it's on my bookshelf!) seems like a bible to me, All books that our friend has written have the same content. No matter how much examples given, it's just an interpretation of the facts. Genes and memes are passed on to the next generation, that's a fact. His interpretation? i don't like it!
Mar 30, 2021 at 16:07 comment added J.G. I don't know why you're pretending Richard Dawkins has a knighthood; he's never likely to get one from the head of the Church of England. In any case, evolution is not according to him, nor according to millions of scientists worldwide. Rather, it is according to mountains of evidence. Please read book-length treatments of said evidence.
Mar 30, 2021 at 9:32 history edited Deschele Schilder CC BY-SA 4.0
added 374 characters in body
Mar 29, 2021 at 15:36 comment added Deschele Schilder @Oбжорoв Then the question shouldn't be asked. How do you want to explain pain? There is definitely a physical correlate in our body and brain if I experience pain. This doesn't explain the awareness of pain though.
Mar 29, 2021 at 15:25 comment added Oбжорoв this is a physics website, there should be no place for concepts like the "soul". It is not because we are very far from explaining perception of colours, consciousness etc now that you have to qualify categorically as it can not be explained by physics. Think about the advances science has made since the Greeks. They would have said natural science cannot explain this and that it must be something extra. Science has been chipping away relentlessly the "explanations" of religion. Never say never.
Mar 29, 2021 at 12:30 history answered Deschele Schilder CC BY-SA 4.0