Evolution and religion , a hundred years ago

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by germanos


I would: If you don't want to think (e.g. belief), then you're not being very intellectual

beleif is not the absense of thought

beleif is a lot of what makes up what is human, and is a lot of what makes humans worth while (and I am not just talking about religious beleif here)

if you have not beleif (And again, I am not talking about religious beleif) then I think you are missing something in your life

Jon Miller
(belief can exist in art or ideology or philosophy or all sorts of other aspects of life that make things interesting)
(beleif even exists in areas of science)

[Jon Miller]

it is the ability to believe that sets us apart from computers, and defines are sentience

JM

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Mr. Harley
believe me folks, Spiffor hit the "Religious Right" definition very nicely (BTW Spiffor are you originally from the USA?)

Oh no I'm not

But with my years of Apolytoning, I think I have understood quite a few things about the US society

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Mr. Harley
Jon Miller is talking about Religious Fundamentalism. I have had many friends who are Religious Fundamentlists, but none who were members of the Religious Right. Jon is, from his posts, a devout Religious Fundamentalist (redundant terminology?), which is why while I may disagree with him at times, I've noticed that in general he is one of the more polite people here. Of course a Religious Fundamentalist complaining about his lack of success with the ladies...

I am unfortunately not always polite. Especially at times in discussions about abortion, I lose my cool. Many fine people here who I respect can attest to this.

Jon Miller

[germanos]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
beleif is a lot of what makes up what is human, and is a lot of what makes humans worth while (and I am not just talking about religious beleif here)

if you have not beleif (And again, I am not talking about religious beleif) then I think you are missing something in your life

Jon Miller
(belief can exist in art or ideology or philosophy or all sorts of other aspects of life that make things interesting)
(beleif even exists in areas of science)

Yes, to belief is to be human, I agree

Originally posted by Jon Miller

beleif is not the absense of thought

Belief however has nothing to do with intellect.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by germanos
Belief however has nothing to do with intellect.

ok, I will agree with that

but your earlier statement was that beleif was against thought?

unless I misunderstood you

Jon Miller

[Atahualpa]

Originally posted by Jon Miller


I am unfortunately not always polite. Especially at times in discussions about abortion, I lose my cool. Many fine people here who I respect can attest to this.

Jon Miller

AT LEAST you go straight for the REAL issues

[germanos]

Jon, we are going a bit in circles I belief

Originally posted by Jon Miller

fundamentalism is a strong beleif...

I would not call a true fundamentalist nonintellectual

Originally posted by Germanos

belief ... has nothing to do with intellect

I might have put it in wrong, but I do think that fundamentalists are non-intellectual.
They might not be stupid...

unfortunately they aren't.

[Solomwi]

The modern scientific man will tell you that you can only get the amount of energy out of a machine which you have previously put into it. Something cannot be produced out of nothing. If a man is an evolution of the mollusc, then the perfect man — the Buddha-man, the Christ-man — was involved in the mollusc.

It may just be a faulty example, but I don't think this link holds up to scrutiny. It would if one particular mollusc morphed into a man, but that's not the case. Over the many, many generations it would have taken for the mollusc to become man, our mollusc-man (here taken to mean all steps along the chain) would have tons of "input" from the environment, thus shaping the intermediary and directing the chain in ways that need not necessarily have been inherent in the original mollusc.

This is basically an altered version of the Second Law of Thermodynamics argument against evolution. The Swami paraphrases the first law, then twists it a little to arrive at the second law argument. The main failure of this argument is in trying to apply a law of thermo to a different realm. Just because we can't create energy doesn't mean we can't create complexity. For an example, take a look at government. Today's innumerable and complex theories of government weren't necessarily involved in the original "Grog have bigger club... Grog rule" model of government, but they have certainly evolved from that first form.

The premise is an interesting take, but the rationale seems to me to need work, at least on that point.

[Immortal Wombat]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Evolution and religion , a hundred years ago

Originally posted by The diplomat
Of course, humans are "superior" to animals. We have reason and intellect which animals lack. Isn't it obvious that animals are "inferior" to humans? Surely, you don't think that a snail or a cat has the "same potential for divinity" as a human being?

No, it does not degrade creation. Animals are a beautiful part of creation. They fulfill very important functions. The idea of "elevating the lower creation to level of an unrealised man or God" is preposterous! You're saying that a snail or a spider could become a man or a god? That's ridiculous! How could an animal become a god when it lacks an intellect or a moral conscious?

How could a human become a god when it lacks the capacity for omnipotence?

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by Japher
DONT GET IT TWISTED

is not going to catch on

Nobody give a sheit mofo it's not SUPPOSED to catch on ya buster ass trick DONT GET IT TWISTED

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
ok, how about this

I know lots of fundamentalists.. who are very well educated

some are even creationists

A fundamentalist is somebody who adhere to the doctrine that the holy books of his religion are literal and inerrant.

Therefore, Christian fundamentalists are those who hold that the bible is literal and inerrant.

You may know many well educated fundamentalists. As you know, that does not counter statisical evidence.

[Urban Ranger]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Evolution and religion , a hundred years ago

Originally posted by The diplomat
We have reason and intellect which animals lack. Isn't it obvious that animals are "inferior" to humans?

No.

Animals don't cause large scale destruction of the environment and carry out genocides of other animals.

[Flip McWho]

There are lots of signs of intellect in the animal world. Cats or Dogs that know how to open a door, or how they show you that they want to leave the house by coming to you, meowing and then running to the door so that you open it for them.
Dogs can even understand what we say or they can learn to interpret our commands.

Most of those just involve habit and training. No actual real intellect. A nice test may possibly be being able to recognise yourself in the mirror.

[Urban Ranger]

Re: Re: Re: Evolution and religion , a hundred years ago

Originally posted by aneeshm
But are organisms lower in the evolutionary chain held to have the same potential for divinity as man ?

Terms such as "lower" and "higher" have no meaning in evolution. Lower in what? Higher in what?

Relations of species are usually drawn in the form of a tree, but it does not mean those closer to the "root" (the common ancestor) are "lower." It means they appeared earlier on earth. It also usually means they are less complex.

But then you have things such as viruses and parasites that throw a monkey wrench into this. Clearly, a virus could not have existed before some organism it can live inside evolves.