Re: paleonet "senseful"

[kmonsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

> Dear Dr Monsch,
(snip)
> I was not replying to your missive, but to Peter Hosier's; I simply used
> your
> epitome as a convenient springboard. When christians of all sorts of

Thanks for explaining. From your wording it wasn't clear to me that this
is what you meant.

(snip)
> Your dismissal of my opinion that the only way that religious beliefs
> could
> interact with science is as a subject of study I believe to be premature.
> As
> the study of brain function and development progresses, explanations of
> why
> some people have no need to believe in gods while others feel they must,
> will
> surely be one of the results. I hope this is the case.

Again, it was your wording that was not clear to me. I thought you implied
that religious beliefs are some sort of neurological disease that must be
sorted out by brain research. I'm not sure though if what you propose is
something that anybody else is waiting for, but I think it goes beyond the
scope of this list to devote more time to it. Okay, that's it then. Hope
we can carry on discussing evolution and faith without misunderstanding or
quarreling.

Ken