Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 167 (8188 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-22-2014 5:43 PM
77 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Golffly
Post Volume:
Total: 744,424 Year: 30,265/28,606 Month: 1,994/3,328 Week: 154/616 Day: 93/61 Hour: 3/8


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
345Next
Author Topic:   Can survival of the fittest accomodate morals?
Hyroglyphx
Member (Idle past 696 days)
Posts: 5140
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006


Message 16 of 64 (551676)
03-23-2010 5:36 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Den
03-22-2010 12:45 AM


My question to the Athiests/ Evolutionists is why can rape, murder and poligamy in the animal kingdom be seen as natural and successful in the eyes of natural selection for all animals, but why does science exclude homo sapiens from conducting such behaviour? why are those people who rape and murder put in prison instead of respected, such as the strong lion? why dont we imprison other animals which commit such acts? isnt this a double standard?

That doesn't even make sense. You are using terms as if all of ecology has a standard of morality. Most things in nature are amoral.


"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Den, posted 03-22-2010 12:45 AM Den has not yet responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 13111
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 17 of 64 (551741)
03-24-2010 1:17 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Den
03-22-2010 12:45 AM


Since rape, murder and poligamy is common in the animal kingdom and I dont know of any case in the animal world where biological science considers that any animal which uses either rape, murder or poligamy in order to pass on its genes unsuccessful.

For example, lions murder the cubs of other lions and then rape the lionesses when they take over a new pride, rape is common in Dolphins, yet all this is considered as a positive natural process in the eyes of biological science.

There's a guy on these forums you ought to talk to. By a curious coincidence, his name is also Den, and he also comes from Australia. And here, he wrote:

You say Nature as stupid,wasteful and cruel? Thats just your perception of reality. Everything is perfect [...] Nothing is wasted in nature, nothing is wrong or imperfect [...] Nature in all its forms is perfect.

Now he really does thing that rape and infanticide are not merely "positive", but absolutely perfect in every respect. Funny thing is, though (this will surprise you) he's not a biologist. He's a creationist.

Perhaps you could challenge him to a debate. I'm sure the two of you must have a lot to talk about.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Den, posted 03-22-2010 12:45 AM Den has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Den, posted 03-24-2010 2:39 AM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Den
Member (Idle past 1627 days)
Posts: 36
From: Australia
Joined: 03-21-2010


Message 18 of 64 (551750)
03-24-2010 2:39 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Dr Adequate
03-24-2010 1:17 AM


You are taking what I have said out of context, maybe I've failed to explain myself properly or perhaps you are just on an immature ego trip.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-24-2010 1:17 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-24-2010 2:49 AM Den has not yet responded
 Message 20 by Percy, posted 03-24-2010 8:02 AM Den has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 13111
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 19 of 64 (551753)
03-24-2010 2:49 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Den
03-24-2010 2:39 AM


You are taking what I have said out of context, maybe I've failed to explain myself properly or perhaps you are just on an immature ego trip.

I provided the context --- I gave the link to your post.

But if I have misrepresented your ideas, then please feel free to explain yourself further. You wrote "Nature in all its forms is perfect". Now, please tell us. Does that include dolphins committing rape and lions committing infanticide, or doesn't it?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Den, posted 03-24-2010 2:39 AM Den has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Drosophilla, posted 03-24-2010 3:16 PM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 13427
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 20 of 64 (551787)
03-24-2010 8:02 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Den
03-24-2010 2:39 AM


Den writes:

You are taking what I have said out of context, maybe I've failed to explain myself properly or perhaps you are just on an immature ego trip.

I noted the contradiction myself when I first read that message, and I think Dr Adequate has accurately captured your views. I didn't reply to your message because so far with you it's been, "So many mistakes, so little time." One has to carefully pick and choose else there'd be no time to eat or sleep.

But if we've misunderstood you then please just clarify. Is murder and rape in nature immoral and not to be imitated by man? Or is murder and rape in nature just another perfect part of God's perfect creation, and hence to be admired and (gasp!) aped?

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Den, posted 03-24-2010 2:39 AM Den has not yet responded

    
Hyroglyphx
Member (Idle past 696 days)
Posts: 5140
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006


Message 21 of 64 (551817)
03-24-2010 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Den
03-22-2010 12:45 AM


Muddled terms
Since rape, murder and poligamy is common in the animal kingdom and I dont know of any case in the animal world where biological science considers that any animal which uses either rape, murder or poligamy in order to pass on its genes unsuccessful.

Natural procreation in animals and the social ills of "rape" within human morality are not synonymous. Animals cannot be immoral for the sole fact that they have no moral sense. That would make them "amoral," which is very different from "immoral." To do so has you setting yourself up as the arbiter of how animals should act.

My question to the Athiests/ Evolutionists is why can rape, murder and poligamy in the animal kingdom be seen as natural and successful in the eyes of natural selection for all animals, but why does science exclude homo sapiens from conducting such behaviour? why are those people who rape and murder put in prison instead of respected, such as the strong lion? why dont we imprison other animals which commit such acts? isnt this a double standard?

Humans are moral creatures, lions are not. They don't understand morals in the same sense that a human would, so there is no significance and no need to muddle the terms. If things evolved in a different manner, it is possible that the social phenomena we refer to as "rape" could have been very different. It is possible that if through a different set of circumstances, what we call rape might have been natural sexual behavior within this species.

But since it is not, it is useless to speculate.

Since homo sapiens follows a completely different moral code to the entire animal kingdom is it possible that humans fit outside the order of the rest of the animal kingdom? Could this mean we have a different origin? a unique purpose?

Possible, yes. Plausible though? I don't think there is any evidence to support the assertion. We see a less defined sense of altruism in the animal kingdom, but generally increasing depending upon the level of intelligence as well as more complex and defined with mammals. You can call that sense of altruism "less evolved" or "more archaic," whatever you want to call it. In primates it is even more defined as you go up in lineage until you get to humans which have a very well defined set of altruistic and moralistic behavior.

Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.


"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Den, posted 03-22-2010 12:45 AM Den has not yet responded

    
Drosophilla
Member (Idle past 167 days)
Posts: 172
From: Doncaster, yorkshire, UK
Joined: 08-25-2009


Message 22 of 64 (551851)
03-24-2010 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Dr Adequate
03-24-2010 2:49 AM


Lack of worldly knowledge?
Hi Dr A,

But if I have misrepresented your ideas, then please feel free to explain yourself further. You wrote "Nature in all its forms is perfect". Now, please tell us. Does that include dolphins committing rape and lions committing infanticide, or doesn't it?

It's a fair bet friend Den is clueless about your ecological revelations. I have tended to find over the years that most creationists are mind-bogglingly ignorant about most matters in the natural world.

I even encountered a creationist on another site who screamed at me that the fact we have opposable thumbs was proof we aren't related to other primates! I asked him if he'd ever been to a zoo and gazed at the opposable thumbs, and big toes, of the chimps, monkeys, gorillas ......he went very silent.

As did the idiot who maintained that features like wings couldn't develop gradually since if it didn't work the very first time the critter would be gobbled up. I replied "What you mean like ostriches don't exist - wings but no flight whatsoever- so they obviously must all get eaten?" Again, total silence - you could almost hear him think "Oh shit - I didn't think about that!"

I have a notion that if these creationists were thrust into the field of ecology for a year there would be likely to be quite a reduction in the number of them pushing views on debate boards such as these. It's amazing what a bit of real education can do for a person!

Edited by Drosophilla, : No reason given.

Edited by Drosophilla, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-24-2010 2:49 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by hooah212002, posted 03-24-2010 10:44 PM Drosophilla has responded
 Message 24 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-25-2010 1:28 AM Drosophilla has responded
 Message 25 by dwise1, posted 03-25-2010 1:40 AM Drosophilla has responded

  
hooah212002
Member
Posts: 3179
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 23 of 64 (551872)
03-24-2010 10:44 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Drosophilla
03-24-2010 3:16 PM


Re: Lack of worldly knowledge?
It's amazing what a bit of real education can do for a person!

Too right, mate. If only they came here for that..........

Edited by hooah212002, : yargh, me sig


"Some people think God is an outsized, light-skinned male with a long white beard, sitting on a throne somewhere up there in the sky, busily tallying the fall of every sparrow. Othersfor example Baruch Spinoza and Albert Einsteinconsidered God to be essentially the sum total of the physical laws which describe the universe. I do not know of any compelling evidence for anthropomorphic patriarchs controlling human destiny from some hidden celestial vantage point, but it would be madness to deny the existence of physical laws."-Carl Sagan

"Show me where Christ said "Love thy fellow man, except for the gay ones." Gay people, too, are made in my God's image. I would never worship a homophobic God." -Desmond Tutu


This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Drosophilla, posted 03-24-2010 3:16 PM Drosophilla has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Drosophilla, posted 03-25-2010 8:51 AM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 13111
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 24 of 64 (551887)
03-25-2010 1:28 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Drosophilla
03-24-2010 3:16 PM


Re: Lack of worldly knowledge?
I even encountered a creationist on another site who screamed at me that the fact we have opposable thumbs was proof we aren't related to other primates! I asked him if he'd ever been to a zoo and gazed at the opposable thumbs, and big toes, of the chimps, monkeys, gorillas ......he went very silent.

It would be a pretty bizarre argument even if his premise was true. Evolution is not, after all, a process whereby things stay exactly the same ...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Drosophilla, posted 03-24-2010 3:16 PM Drosophilla has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Drosophilla, posted 03-25-2010 8:54 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 2230
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 25 of 64 (551890)
03-25-2010 1:40 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Drosophilla
03-24-2010 3:16 PM


Re: Lack of worldly knowledge?
I have a notion that if these creationists were thrust into the field of ecology for a year there would be likely to be quite a reduction in the number of them pushing views on debate boards such as these. It's amazing what a bit of real education can do for a person!

For example, Glenn R. Morton, who has participated on this forum. He converted in college, learned practically everything he knew about geology from the ICR et al. and authored a number of published creationist geology articles (eg,

quote:
I published 27 articles and notes in the Creation Research Society Quarterly, presented a paper at the first International Conference on Creationism, and ghost wrote the evolution section in Josh McDowell's book Reasons Skeptics Should Consider Christianity.

Graduated from college with a BS Physics and, facing a market that wasn't hiring physics grads, went to work as a field geologist for a petroleum company, even hired several other creationist geologists. Reported at the 1986 International Conference on Creationism how they had to face and work with rock-hard evidence that the ICR had taught them did not exist and could not exist for Scripture to have any meaning and that they had all suffered "severe crises of faith". It was later that he was himself driven to the verge of atheism, but was finally able to find an harmonization that preserved his faith. Though he is definitely no longer a creationist.

His own story is told at:
The Transformation of a Young-earth Creationist
Why I left Young-earth Creationism

He posts other "Personal Stories of the Creation/Evolution Struggle" are posted at http://home.entouch.net/dmd/person.htm

Share and enjoy!

I have tended to find over the years that most creationists are mind-bogglingly ignorant about most matters in the natural world.

I've had the same experience, though with many who would be on either side of the divide. There's some serious ignorance out there.

Though still, I have found that the surest way to anger a creationist is to take his claims seriously and try to discuss them with him. My first interpretation was that they knew that they were lying and now were finding themselves caught in their lie. But I came to realize that they simply did not know what they were talking about. They were just regurgitating some creationist crap that they had read and understood none of it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Drosophilla, posted 03-24-2010 3:16 PM Drosophilla has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Drosophilla, posted 03-25-2010 9:03 AM dwise1 has responded

    
Drosophilla
Member (Idle past 167 days)
Posts: 172
From: Doncaster, yorkshire, UK
Joined: 08-25-2009


Message 26 of 64 (551920)
03-25-2010 8:51 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by hooah212002
03-24-2010 10:44 PM


Re: Lack of worldly knowledge?
Too right, mate. If only they came here for that..........

They do Hooah, but they intend to educate us - not the other way round....it's amazing what confidence belief in God instills...!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by hooah212002, posted 03-24-2010 10:44 PM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

  
Drosophilla
Member (Idle past 167 days)
Posts: 172
From: Doncaster, yorkshire, UK
Joined: 08-25-2009


Message 27 of 64 (551921)
03-25-2010 8:54 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Dr Adequate
03-25-2010 1:28 AM


Re: Lack of worldly knowledge?
It would be a pretty bizarre argument even if his premise was true. Evolution is not, after all, a process whereby things stay exactly the same ...

Agreed - but that is quite subtle for creationists to swallow. But you'd at least think they'd get out there to zoos and such like to see how things really are - physically in nature - before arguing from ignorance. It's not hard to see opposable thumbs, and toes on primates in zoos is it? Don't these guys ever 'get out'?

Edited by Drosophilla, : No reason given.

Edited by Drosophilla, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-25-2010 1:28 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
Drosophilla
Member (Idle past 167 days)
Posts: 172
From: Doncaster, yorkshire, UK
Joined: 08-25-2009


Message 28 of 64 (551922)
03-25-2010 9:03 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by dwise1
03-25-2010 1:40 AM


Re: Lack of worldly knowledge?
Hi Dwise1

Graduated from college with a BS Physics and, facing a market that wasn't hiring physics grads, went to work as a field geologist for a petroleum company, even hired several other creationist geologists. Reported at the 1986 International Conference on Creationism how they had to face and work with rock-hard evidence that the ICR had taught them did not exist and could not exist for Scripture to have any meaning and that they had all suffered "severe crises of faith". It was later that he was himself driven to the verge of atheism, but was finally able to find an harmonization that preserved his faith. Though he is definitely no longer a creationist.
His own story is told at:
The Transformation of a Young-earth Creationist
Why I left Young-earth Creationism

He posts other "Personal Stories of the Creation/Evolution Struggle" are posted at http://home.entouch.net/dmd/person.htm

Share and enjoy

I'd heard about Glen Morton before - I think possibly reading one of your earlier threads - thanks for fleshing out the details for me.

As a sad counterbalance though it can swing the other way:

I believe Kurt Wise was a Harvard trained geologist who learned under Steven J Gould (no less) and realised the bible and the geology he learnt were incompatible. Apparently he cut out all parts of the bible that had to go if our geological understanding is correct - and he found there was virtually nothing left of the bible.

So he made a choice - and turned to fundamentalism and rejected his Harvard geology degree and all his hopes for a scientific future - simply because he was forced to make a choice over two incompatible systems....and in his case creationism won!

Don't know about you but I find that very sad.....so much lost on so little (well none actually!) evidence.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by dwise1, posted 03-25-2010 1:40 AM dwise1 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by dwise1, posted 03-25-2010 10:57 AM Drosophilla has not yet responded

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 2230
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 29 of 64 (551930)
03-25-2010 10:57 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Drosophilla
03-25-2010 9:03 AM


Re: Lack of worldly knowledge?
I had heard of Kurt Wise many years ago and read an interview with him several years ago on AnswersinGenesis. As I recall, he had grown up in a fundamentalist home and had taken the scissors to his Bible long before he started work on his doctorate, so he had pursued his education despite his religious beliefs. As I recall him describing it, the evidence in favor of evolution is extensive and solid, so he was making a personal choice in favor of his faith over evolution (though I'm surprised that it had apparently never occurred to him that such a choice is not necessary). Furthermore, the reports I had read of him prior to reading the interview was that he was a stickler for truthfulness and accuracy and had on many occasions been the one who examined and tested creationist evidence and reported them as not being what the creationists were claiming.

So my impression of him was that he was an incredibly and refreshingly honest creationist who did not let his beliefs get in the way of science. Unfortunately, the last that I had heard of him was that he had joined forces with the ICR, so I fear that since he has fallen in with a bad crowd his honesty may have suffered.

BTW, having worked on my family history, I'm fairly sure that we're not related. "Wise" is a common anglization of several different German and Jewish surnames.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Drosophilla, posted 03-25-2010 9:03 AM Drosophilla has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by RAZD, posted 03-25-2010 7:19 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 16236
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 30 of 64 (552007)
03-25-2010 7:19 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by dwise1
03-25-2010 10:57 AM


Re: Lack of worldly knowledge?
Hi dwise and Drosophilla,

So my impression of him was that he was an incredibly and refreshingly honest creationist who did not let his beliefs get in the way of science.

google "honest creationist" -- with the quotes.

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : h


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by dwise1, posted 03-25-2010 10:57 AM dwise1 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by rockondon, posted 03-29-2010 4:18 PM RAZD has responded

  
Prev1
2
345Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014