To all the materialists who think the incredible designs of nature - including on fish, birds, flowers and even caterpillars - emerge from nothing more than the most reductionist scientific evolutionary forces, I joyously disagree with you.

Apr 5, 2021 · 4:04 AM UTC

177
136
88
1,697
I shouldn’t have used the word “reductionist” that way. The people criticizing me on that one are right. My bad. Sorry.
26
7
1
385
Load newest
Replying to @marwilliamson
“We will show them Our signs in the universe and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that it is the truth. But is it not sufficient concerning your Lord that He is, over all things, a Witness?” Quran chapter 41 verse 53
5
Replying to @marwilliamson
Their descriptions of the mechanisms are valid. That is the MATERIAL. what they can't grasp is the genesis of their MATTER.
1
1
Replying to @marwilliamson
I do so wish this perception of realism as brooding joyless mathematical calculation weren’t so prevalent. I, and many evolutionary biologists I know of, aren’t disposed of joy or wonder at life because we believe it came about naturally, it’s just as beautiful and awe-inspiring.
1
10
Replying to @marwilliamson
that's cool. you're wrong but whatever
2
Replying to @marwilliamson
1
2
7
0
Replying to @marwilliamson
nope, a pretty flower or mountain still isn't gonna get me to believe in god but thank you
2
1
7
Replying to @marwilliamson
Marianne please look at this octopus
1
1
1
74
Replying to @marwilliamson
Idk, this isn't exactly a scientific, materialist arguement, but I think that assuming that there was some cosmic force guiding creation, or that everything is just straight-up created by some guy just makes the universe less cool and interesting imo. Like, the idea that all...
1
1
36
Replying to @marwilliamson
You seen this?
1
25
Load more