|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: What we must accept if we accept evolution | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
On its own, the Theory says nothing whatsoever about what happened 10 million years ago. We actually need to plug data into the theory to reach conclusions. Data such as genetic similarity, fossil morphology, current morphology, etc etc. We can then see if a hypothesis about common ancestors can be falsified, or strengthened...using the theory. I am not suggesting there is evidence for the theory but no evidence for its conclusions. Actually quite the contrary. The conclusions are based on combining physical evidence with the ToE. I don't see how this distinction you are making between theory and "practice" matters. If there is plenty of evidence for the "practice," then I'm including that as part of the definition.If that is imprecise, then we can just say I mean the TOE plus conclusions. What matters is the evidence. So let me reiterate my central position: Even if accepting ToE somehow means rejecting a supernatural creator it does not mean rejecting all other supernatural entities and explanations. What might these "supernatural entities" be? If supernatural, then they are not natural. Aliens are natural beings--at least that's the normal definition--so we can rule them out. These beings are supernatural in that they are purely mental. Yet they were created by the physical universe at its inception. It seems we are right back to where we started. Just as the physical cannot produce the supernatural on earth, it also cannot produce the supernatural in intersellar space during the age of a young universe. abe: sorry about the earlier sarcasm. This message has been edited by robinrohan, 01-28-2006 06:41 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Your concept, maybe. It doesn't do anything to my concept. Your sensibilities must be very dull, Crashfrog. But there is an advantage that comes out of a philosophy of which evolution is the base. It is so good, so satisfying, isn't it, to not be egotistical like all those religious people are. I just love myself for that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
I'm simply intelligent enough to recognize the difference between the significance some things or some people have to me, personally Yeah, it's so great to be INTELLIGENT, isn't it? And those other folks--the Pennsylvania coal-miner, the Texas farmer--how egotistical it is for them to believe in God. What egoists they are!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
As infinite as you theists are always assert your God is, and as magnificent as the universe is, you tell me about the degree of conceit involved in asserting that it all exists for you. For someone so intelligent as you are, Crashfrog, you have to be the biggest fool I ever met in my life.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
You seem to think I'm going to have some problem putting forth my position as humble when I'm essentially saying I'm smarter than most people. And it's true. Put me in a room with 100 random people and odds are I do better on tests and stuff than all but 1 or 2 of them. But you tell me which is the greater ego - the conclusion that one has an IQ of 135 or so, which isn't that high but puts me in the 98th percentile at least*, and that I have the statistics and assessments to prove; or the guy who believes that the entire universe has been bequeathed to him as his playground, by a cosmic eternal entity with powers beyond imagining who could do or create anything, but seems to content himself with monitoring the minutae of what he eats, says, and who he has sex with? I'm very impressed with your "data," but the idea that religion is a egotistical, conceited sort of belief is not accurate. It would be if this Christian thought that he was the only one being monitored by God. But the Christian or whatever does not believe that. He believes that everyone is monitored by God. I suppose one might say that the Christian is conceited about the entire human race, but that's not egotism. Egotism is a personal view about oneself. For example, a person might be conceited about their intelligence as compared to other people. Or one might be conceited about one's appearance. Or one might think one is better than others because one has more power, or more money, or a more interesting or more exotic job. Now it is true that evolution tells us that we are no more significant than a snail. (Gastronomically speaking, we are inferior to the snail--if you care for escargot). What we do or don't do matters not in the least in the long run, in the objective run. It is of no more importance than any other natural event. But I do find it very strange that my great-to-the-nth grandfather was a lizard, large or small. That's the part I find mind-boggling. This message has been edited by robinrohan, 01-29-2006 10:54 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Not to be picky I hope, but strictly speaking, the spiritual is no less natural than the physical I'm defining nature as everything physical. Anything that is not physical, if it existed, would be other than nature. Nature can't produce anything except physical things. So the incorporeal is supernatural--meaning "other than natural."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
"I feel so special and superior and chosen because I am a Born Again christian, so I'm going to go to Heaven no matter what and all of these other heathens who aren't born again are going to burn in Hell." In my view, if I were a believer, that would be blasphemy.
Yeah, it is pretty amazing, huh? But how is this important? It's not important. It's just an emotional reaction that I have when contemplating evolution.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
So, according to you, the number five is supernatural? The #5 is an abstraction. It doesn't exist. However, if thinking were truly incorporeal and if thoughts were real, thoughts would be supernatural. Evolution however shows us that thinking is a physical activity, so there's nothing supernatural about it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
We just want you saved WITH us I would think that even cocksure certainty about oneself being saved would be blasphemous--but I'm not sure if that's orthodox or not.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Anyway, feelings of spiritual superiority to others are definitely blasphemous, I would think.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Many of us have doubts about our salvation. Falling into sin certainly produces doubts. But there's nothing humble about such doubts This is off-topic, but just one more point. So when the Puritan Calvinist Anne Bradstreet writes, "I could not read my evidence,"this is not humility in the good sense, but rather Despair, which is a sin. Would that be a correct orthodox statement?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
I don't understand why this is so personal for you. Can you explain why you're completely unable to approach this discussion with any detachment? You are wrong, Crashfrog. I was just kidding around with you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Faith: Would you stop using up all the posts on this thread with your chitchat with Iano?
Crashfrog: Actually I admire your concise and knowledgeable posts. But you can be mighty harsh with people, so you have to expect a little of it back sometimes. Joke. A tease. Parsomnium and I tease each other all the time. Now, it's true, sometimes one is not quite sure if it registered as a tease or not-- one has to be a little careful with that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
THAT is on topic? Very funny--and yet another post used up. As soon as I think of another comment to make--an ON-TOPIC comment--I will edit this post.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
So what does it mean that you are conceited about the human race? A Christian might be called "conceited" about the human race. We are made in God's image and so forth.
How does this affect how you interact with your fellow man? I don't know. You would have to ask a religious person. Maybe it makes one value humans more. Everyone you talk to--terrorist or not--is an immortal soul, in their eyes.
Evolution does not employ significance. Significance is a matter of human convention That's right, and that's all it is. It means nothing--objectively speaking. We are of no more significance than the wind blowing across the Texas plains.
Do you believe humans to be superior RR? Only in a subjective, emotional way.
So you have traced your family tree back far enough to conclude what your ultimate ancestor was? Yeah, I have this map of my family tree. The lizard's name was "Roscoe." Quite a character he was. Great with his tongue.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024