One is an atheist. They other is a born-again. One can't make up his mind. They are discussing a virgin ant birth.
2007-09-24 04:27:04 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Anthropology
SQUISH...
Man (God) just ended their conversation!
2007-09-24 20:48:46 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, hopefully they would come to the conclusion that there's really no way to prove or disprove the existence of Man. Since the entire point of believing in Man (as apposed to just knowing of Man) is that it requires a certain measure of faith in Man's existence, the atheist ant, the born-again ant and the undecided ant could not prove Man's existence one way or another,
As far as the virgin ant birth goes, it could all just be a fairy tale element added to the story. In any event, whether or not she was a virgin makes no difference. Man can influence an ant's life without having been the "inseminator" of a virgin ant. It seems like this element of the story is borrowed from ant mythology.
I'm assuming Man means God and ant means man?
2007-09-24 11:47:06 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The entire ant colony acts as a single organism, so they don't have a conversation anymore than your fingers talk to each other when you pick an object off the table.
2007-09-27 18:30:00 · answer #3 · answered by nursesr4evr 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋