Whether it strictly describes anything in the world or not, it may still be a effective concept to examine, or manipulate, the world in the context of.
Yes, and I think the richest theology conversations can come from trying to form reasonable rules to live by out of events that don't seem to make any sense in "the real world". Like, say, miracle stories, Bible stories with all their contradictions, Zen koans.
[W]hat we perceive about that system and how we can change it depends quite a bit on the state of mind we approach it with.
Agreed, and I think this is where I have problems with translating into atheist terms.
Given an unexplainable event, a theist can ascribe agency to it. An atheist is forced to not ascribe agency, if I understand the atheist position.
The atheist can say it takes advantage of the complexity of the system in ways that they can't understand; but I don't see how that helps them make decisions.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: Thursday, 23 February 2006 08:46 pm (UTC)Whether it strictly describes anything in the world or not, it may still be a effective concept to examine, or manipulate, the world in the context of.
Yes, and I think the richest theology conversations can come from trying to form reasonable rules to live by out of events that don't seem to make any sense in "the real world". Like, say, miracle stories, Bible stories with all their contradictions, Zen koans.
[W]hat we perceive about that system and how we can change it depends quite a bit on the state of mind we approach it with.
Agreed, and I think this is where I have problems with translating into atheist terms.
Given an unexplainable event, a theist can ascribe agency to it. An atheist is forced to not ascribe agency, if I understand the atheist position.
The atheist can say it takes advantage of the complexity of the system in ways that they can't understand; but I don't see how that helps them make decisions.