Comment history

Letter: Mindless matter

Are you arguing that only scientists are authoritative sources for scientific information? And, Lewis, to my knowledge never claimed to be a scientist.

March 19, 2013 at 3:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Mindless matter

Indeed the universe does depend on relationship. The old theologians called it the "happy company of the Trinity." You are right that the universe would not stand without that relationship. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit from all eternity. And, humans are created in his image. Therefore they have reason as a gift from him. God is personal, not mindless matter. Which was Lewis's point.

March 19, 2013 at 3:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Mindless matter

Indeed the professor's reason is a gift from God. That was Lewis's argument. Those who argue that mind came from mindlessness have a problem that no one has addressed.

It is not a question of "superior reasoning" it's a question of reasoning. What are the arguments that mindless matter can give rise to mind? And, if that is demonstrated what would be the significance? How can significance or meaning arise from mindless matter? There is no meaning in all involved in this discourse if it is only the result of mindless matter over time.

The professor has a wonderful mind. And, wonderful reasoning ability. That ability neither affirms nor denies Mr. Upchurch's argument.

March 19, 2013 at 2:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Mindless matter

The orthodox Christian would reply, yes there is relationship in the universe. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have enjoyed a relationship from eternity. So the source of reason is not the universe apart from God, but indeed from God himself. Humans are created in the image and likeness of God.

March 19, 2013 at 2:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Mindless matter

No one has yet answered Mr. Upchurch's challenge regarding the source of the professor's reason.

C.S. Lewis, by the way, was an Anglican, not a Catholic. And, of course he was not making a "scientific" argument. Rather, a philosophic one. Which, again, no one has addressed.

March 19, 2013 at 12:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Mindless matter

Because Mr. Upchurch's reason is a gift of God. It is not a gift of mindless matter, which is the issue no one has yet addressed.

March 19, 2013 at 11:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Mindless matter

Really? Where are you confused? Arguments? REASONS?

March 19, 2013 at 9:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

State board urged to seek millions in school funding

Thank you, Mr. Trabert, for actual arguments and not simply labeling and name-calling. How anyone who has had to wait in line at the Post Office or the DMV and still wants more government involvement in anything is beyond my ken.

July 5, 2012 at 3:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Senate committee approves map putting Lawrence in 2nd U.S. House District

Why should we trust Mr. Rothschild's reporting? "Lawrence, which leans Democratic." That's the second time in a week he has used that phrase. How about, "Lawrence, which votes consistently and heavily Democratic" as an accurate statement?

February 2, 2012 at 12:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

SRS Secretary Siedlecki steps down, returning to Florida

Mr. Rothschild will have to change his computer. SRS Secretary "Robert Siedlecki Jr., who tried to shut down the Lawrence SRS office." I am sure he has had that phrase programmed to automatically type out whenever he began typing the words "SRS Secretary." Why should I trust anything Mr. Rothschild reports?

December 15, 2011 at 4:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal )