What we must accept if we accept evolution

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. 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

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.

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!

For someone so intelligent as you are, Crashfrog, you have to be the biggest fool I ever met in my life.

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

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."

In my view, if I were a believer, that would be blasphemy. It's not important. It's just an emotional reaction that I have when contemplating evolution.

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.

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.

Anyway, feelings of spiritual superiority to others are definitely blasphemous, I would think.

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?

You are wrong, Crashfrog. I was just kidding around with you.

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.

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.

A Christian might be called "conceited" about the human race. We are made in God's image and so forth. 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. 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. Only in a subjective, emotional way. Yeah, I have this map of my family tree. The lizard's name was "Roscoe." Quite a character he was. Great with his tongue.