Evolution and Specialness of Humanity

quote:

---

As you can see, any social implications are irrelevant to the fact.

---

X is false because the implications are not visible to me. The implications on humanity and significance don't exist.

---

I am smiling.

Do you think I could get that principle published in a logic journal?

quote:

---

X is false because the implications are not visible to me.
  —Prophex

---

Like a blind man who denies that the Sun exists.Anyway, you still haven't established how exactly this "specialness" that you've observed negates evolution and proves Genesis.

quote:

---

How I think evolution puts it has been already said by me in just about every one of my posts.

---

But you left out the very next sentence, Charlie. .I already know your distorted, tortured, bizzaro misinterpretation.I want you to show that this is also how scientists think about the meaning of the ToE.

quote:

---

Why did this reply take so long? Because after reading this I simply gave up on schraf. She can't see past basic concepts, and definitions of ideas.

---

Look, I'm askling questions in order to fully understand.Your strange interpretation of science is at complete odds with everthing I have ever learned or figured out or read or been taught about science.If you cannot answer my very basic questions, then I have no reason to lend any credence to your version.This message has been edited by schrafinator, 10-17-2005 09:41 PM

quote:

---

According to Evolution, you don't have a Soul.

---

Incorrect.According to the Theory of Evolution which is part of of the science of Biology, there is no evidence of a soul. Therefore, the concept of souls are not addressed at all.According to atheism, which is a philosphical worldview, you have no soul.One can believe in souls and also accept the ToE.In fact, this is what most Christian people do.

quote:

---

Anyway, you still haven't established how exactly this "specialness" that you've observed negates evolution and proves Genesis.

---

The "specialness" that exists within humanity negates evolution. It does not necessarily prove Genesis, what it does prove, is Id. I believe the book of Genesis to be true. To backtrack a little from points that I had made in my opening topic, Oparin's hypothesis, the main theory of acceptance to the origin of simple molecules on the earth, from sources of energy such as lightning bolts, and volcanic eruptions combining with the plethera of elements on the earth att he time, a very young earth. Hydrogen, Oxygen, Carbon, and Nitrogen were the foundation for the creation of more complex substances like simple amino acids, and the first molecules on earth. These molecules eventually gave rise to more complex substances, and finally cells started appearing. Evidences for Oparin's hypothesis are the thousands of experiments performed in vaccums by leading scientists. The Famous Miller-Urey Experiment was the first to prove Oparin correct. This is strong evidence for a random creation of the first molecules on earth leading to protocells, and onward. These processes are based largely on random occurences given enough time for the chances of them happening to work.So my point is, that Humanity as we know it, through the eyes of the majority of scientists, and biologists/chemists, is a totally random happening. That humanity is a species that has evolved over millions of years to become homo sapien. Humans are another species, other organisms in a seemingly endless chain of other organisms on Earth. All rules that apply to every organism, applies to humans. Survival of the Fittest is present withing humanity, Natural Selection. (This next point is vital) Human interaction is a construct and result of the way humans have developed and evolved SOCIALLY. Thus, human relationships, love applied to one another is part of a vital interaction to maintain the "species" of Homo Sapien. Our generated feelings and love are all social mechcanisms to aide the survival of our human species.I see much problem with the above in regards to my life, and the lives of every other human on the planet. Being "just another species", all UNIQUENESS, and SIGNIFICANCE, is lost, and humans are as fish swim away from predators in the ocean, humanity is not original in the sense of this difference. Human Life is part of a constant struggle to maintain the species' survival. The love that all humans cherish and give becomes a mechanism for evolution. I believe that this takes away the significance of my feelings for my friends and family, and every discussion at evc I have ever had. Being products of random lightning surges, makes humanity not matter, just part of a cycle that cares not about you, or mankind. It is a vicious unfeeling cycle, totally opposite to that of the living God that has created us. This implication given by the theories of origins for mankind, not only evolution, tells me that they are untrue, and are fabrications of man, turning their backs on God.Human evolution, the social development, provides me with another basis for which to not believe in evolution specifically. I feel that all feeling that I have ever expressed, and given in terms of love is WORTHLESS. It's worthless because it is part of an evolutionary mechanism, and not part of me, or who I share my love with. And the love recieved becomes imaginary, and illusory, only serving the species, and not the loved ones that I believe whoeheartedly love me back. The significance of almost every moment of my life is lost through the idea of evolution. For this alone I would not accept the physical evidence of the idea. I am quite aware of the physical evidence. Creation shows me the beauty, love, and godliness of the world that exists today, whereas it is lost when looked through the lie of evolution.One last thing The temporal and illusory world that is displayed is simply part of a trap, people study this world, sciences devoted to it's understanding, lives dedicated for this single purpose, brilliant minds davvel in the arts of science, and forget that Brahman (God) alone is real. I have provided examples and references from Jesus, and an allegory that has crazy importance for this end. I will reference them from past 2 posts real quick.

quote:

---

Remember a great philosopher Plato, he describes allegorically the phenomenom here at evc and in the world of science. Describes accurately samsara.

​

Imagine prisoners who have been chained since childhood deep inside a cave. Not only are their limbs immobilized by the chains, their heads are as well so that their eyes are fixed on a wall. Behind the prisoners is an enormous fire, and between the fire and the prisoners there is a raised walk way, along which men carry shapes of various animals, plants, and other things. The shapes cast shadows on the wall, which occupy the prisoners' attention. Also, when one of the shape-carriers speaks, an echo against the wall causes the prisoners to believe that the words come from the shadows. The prisoners engage in what appears to us to be a game”naming the shapes as they come by. This, however, is the only reality that they know, even though they are seeing merely shadows of images.

​

Suppose a prisoner is released and compelled to stand up and turn around. His eyes will be blinded by the firelight, and the shapes passing will appear less real than their shadows. Similarly, if he is dragged up out of the cave into the sunlight, his eyes will be so blinded that he will not be able to see anything. At first, he will be able to see darker shapes such as shadows, and only later brighter and brighter objects. The last object he would be able to see is the sun, which, in time, he would learn to see as that object which provides the seasons and the courses of the year, presides over all things in the visible region, and is in some way the cause of all these things that he has seen. (The Republic bk. VII, 516b-c; trans. Paul Shorey) This part of the allegory, incidentally, closely matches Plato's metaphor of the sun which occurs near the end of The Republic Book VI.

​

Once thus enlightened, so to speak, the freed prisoner would no doubt want to return to the cave to free "his fellow bondsmen". The problem however is that they would not want to be freed: descending back into the cave would require that the freed prisoner's eyes adjust again, and for a time, he would be inferior at the ludicrous process of identifying shapes on the wall. This would make his fellow prisoners murderous toward anyone who attempted to free them.

​

I will continue to believe that what are commonly called myths have actually happened, I will continue to deny evolution on the basis of the insignificance for humanity given off, and most importantly, continue to believe in God, Jesus Christ with all of myself, I will continue to avoid the trap of the world. Who sees? The acceptor of physicalities, or the one ignorant to the visible evidence? To use a reference that I use a lot because of it's significance in my life, and the history of when I first heard it;

​

24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel. 25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. 26 Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also. 27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. 28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.

​

The inside of the cup matters. What lies not on the visible outside of the cup, but inside the cup, what is not visible is important. The truth of God takes precendent over physical observations of the known world.

---

1) Random Events described by the Old Earth scenarios to give rise to humanity, destroy all human significance.

​

2) Human evolution's implications on the love and feelings of mankind destroy significance of relationships, and all expressions, feelings.

​

3) Science is the study of a temporal, illusory, and vastly unimportant world in the eyes of God, and one's purpose.

---

I am smiling.

quote:

---

Like, from a Bio textbook

---

Bio textbooks have largely disregarded the social impacts of their written theories, in the way I have tried to explain, best as I could.

---

I am smiling.

Assume for a moment that the ToE is true. How would you go about proving that love is only a mechanism of survival, and that God doesn't exist?

quote:

---

Assume for a moment that the ToE is true. How would you go about proving that love is only a mechanism of survival, and that God doesn't exist?

---

I would point towards the social development of our ancestors, using love as an expression/feeling to survive in groups/families or as a little community later on.

quote:

---

Natural selection is an immensely powerful yet beautifully simple theory that has held up remarkably well, under intense and unrelenting scrutiny and testing, for 135 years. In essence, natural selection locates the mechanism of evolutionary change in a "struggle" among organisms for reproductive success, leading to improved fit of populations to changing environments. ( Struggle is often a metaphorical description and need not be viewed as overt combat, guns blazing. Tactics for reproductive success include a variety of non-martial activities such as earlier and more frequent mating or better cooperation with partners in raising offspring.) Natural selection is therefore a principle of local adaptation, not of general advance or progress.

---

-GouldTo illustrate how random this process of Evolution is: Gould writes of the random events that occurred to make us. The spontaneousness of evolution could have literally not have created us. So we are really unimportant, we have no significance compared to other animals and organisms, we are part of a random process that did not care about our existence.God would not have used evolution to create man, an impartial, random, and unimportant occurrance after occurrance would not have been used by God, to create man slowly and gradually, there is no love within this process, what love is there is a mechanism, God cares for his creation, what is so beautiful about the creation myths, is exactly why I can't believe evolution to be truthfully what happened.That's why I don't accept evolution.This message has been edited by prophex, 10-19-2005 05:39 AM

---

I am smiling.

"Our generated feelings and love are all social mechcanisms to aide the survival of our human species. " - ProphexThis I would argue is probably true."It's worthless because it is part of an evolutionary mechanism, and not part of me, or who I share my love with." - ProhexYou know, you could rewrite that as "It's worthless because it is part of a divine preprogramming, and not part of me, or who I share my love with."If I read you right, the mechanical nature of ToE takes away the relevance of the choice we make to do good. If we are essentially driven to do good, where is the significance of almost every moment of ones life? Ones has no choice.But thats the stumbling block. For you (it seems) taking away Yaweh makes us robots.I would argue that as a species we have evolved drives to be social. But on an individual level, if you feel and receive love, it's not for our gain alone. If this were true we would have no crime or antisocial behaviour because we would be driven to do good.The fact that we do evil and selfish acts means that this must come form Yaweh too (you can't have it both ways). However, to be conscious is to have a choice. We make a judement on what we do. If our up bringing and psychology is not too out of wack (saddly it sometimes is) we learn to do the right thing by other people from our parents and culture.I don't think we are inherently good or evil (although about 1.5% of a given population has resrticted emotional responses of the sort that can churn out violent or manipulative individuals), we learn it from our culture.If co-operation and social behaviour gives a survival advantage it will most likely be retained as a cultural artefact.We learn our attitudes and beliefs from our culture. If you were bought up as a Buddist, you would have that cultural frame work in your head now. You obviously believe what you say; as does every one with an opinion alive today. However, what you or I or anyone here believes should be subject to re-evaluation (or in fact evaluation) that is based a best as we can on evidence NOT wishfull thinking.It's not uncommon to change ones beliefs as you go through life. Thats what makes it fun.

You could also approach it differently: isn't it all the more remarkable and beautiful that such a haphazard process has in fact created you and me, who can feel love? I know for myself that the love I have for others is genuine, even though I rationally think it is a product of my mind, which in turn is a product of my brain, which in turn is a product of evolution. We are the only ones who are capable of entertaining the concept of 'significance'. That in itself already makes us significant, wherever that capability came from. And here we are, defying that uncaring process, by doing just the opposite: caring.I find it much more amazing, almost magical even, to think that a mindless process has created mind, than that mind must have come from another mind. The latter I find utterly uninspiring and banal.

---

"We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further." - Richard Dawkins

And this would proove that God doesn't exist, and that love isn't at all special? Think about it. He sure took his time with me and you. Does that mean he doesn't love us?

quote:

---

Bio textbooks have largely disregarded the social impacts of their written theories, in the way I have tried to explain, best as I could.

---

Einstein's work in Physics allowed the atom bomb to exist.Nuclear proliferation is the single biggest threat to the survival of our species, and the of the entire Earth, today.Therefore, to remain consistent, you must deny the Atomic Theory of Matter due to it's "social implications."You must deny the existence of neutrons, electrons, and atoms.You must deny all of Einstein's work because his discoveries "largely disregarded the social impacts of [his] written theories"

Two people are sitting in front of you.Both of them report feeling the emotion of love.One of them believes in God and the other one doesn't, and you can't know which is which.How can you tell which one feels "real" love and which one feels "fake" love?

quote:

---

I know for myself that the love I have for others is genuine,

---

Not according to Charlie.You only feel "fake" love.Only people who's love comes from a magical sky daddy feel "real" love.(Of course, he can't tell the difference between the kinds of love if he doesn't know your beliefs about God/evolution beforehand...)