Moderna i Malmoe foersenas

Svenska Dagbladet

Invigningen av Moderna museet Malmoe foersenas. Istaellet foer i september vaentas museet sla upp portarna foerst annandag jul. Orsaken till foerseningen aer att ...



and more »

abi moderna lounge2 large jpg
1067px x 800px | 162.60kB

[source page]

homes abi 2006 moderna images abi moderna lounge2 large jpg

What do you think about this assertion regarding logic?
Q. I found this answer to my last question to be interesting. I'd like to see what your responses are to it. Thanks! "In physics we allow logic to assert the existence of particles smaller than an atom despite the fact that we cannot see them through any microscope. We know they are there because we can observe the effects they have on other, larger particles. And we allow that to be called logical thinking. "Yet a religious person who observes the changes in their lives and the effects that faith has on others' lives and concludes there must be something more is called illogical. That inconsistency is itself a logical fallacy that moderna nd postmodern people perpetuate for reasons unknown to me. But I tend to think God has a sense of… [cont.]
Asked by Linz VT - Mon Oct 8 10:43:56 2007 - - 25 Answers - 0 Comments

A. Here's the key part: "there must be something more". Yes, there is something more... something unknown. To assume or draw the conclusion that you know what this something is, THAT is the problem. Maybe it's just a smaller particle that cannot yet be seen. Must we conclude that it's gnomes or fairies? Must we conclude that it's ghosts or spirits? Must we conclude that it's angels or demons? Must we conclude that it's aliens or magick? Why cannot it simply be considered unknown until properly observed, tested, and proven?? Ignorant or weak-minded people LOVE to jump to conclusions. But how silly would it be to apply their logic to other life situations? "My car died on the road. The enemy (Satan) must be attacking me today." No, you ran out… [cont.]
Answered by Dood - Mon Oct 8 11:08:10 2007