Do we talk up or down to fundies?

If they are not natural then what are they. Aren't humans natural? In an ecological world, assigning "evil" to anything is highly arbitrary. Is the guinea worm evil? The flea? A rose bush?”HM Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

qs:Ever here of Andrei Sakharov?He was one of the evil guys. And then He turned. That does not mean he is pure as the wind driven snow. It only means that he is willing to submit to the truth and grow.It is actually a simple concept Archer. A student of mathematics is always a student.A student (or disciple) of Christ is never 'the christ', he is only a student.That's it really...God is good, and we are evil. That is what I believe... He is moral, we are not. But not in the extreme sense that you guys always interpret such things in.It is in manner of relationship; student / teacher, God / man.look at it this way...1 John 1:8 If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us...10 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives.Not complicated... Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

Please reread Message 1 for a refresher on the topic. Get back on track.Please direct any comments concerning this Admin msg to the Moderation Thread.

​

Any response in this thread will receive a 24 hour timeout.Thank you

HM:At least partially...But isn't it telling that we expect them not to be?I think human beings are far more complex than mere animals. If for no other reason, we expect them not to act like animals.Does that not give you pause?Because if you are correct, then what exactly did Cho do at Virginia Tech which was unnatural?And consider this... if everything is natural, then from where did the idea of that which is 'unatural' (religion) originate?Can Richard Dawkins claim that Christians are diseased, as though it is 'unnatural' or worse yet... 'evil'?If you really examine those questions carefully, I think you will quickly see that the moral implications are hideous. In fact, I believe Darwin made a remark to that extent (I'll try to find it).I am not suggesting that you or anyone else is supporting the philosophy I am about to invoke (so do not take this as such), but it is clear that it led to Hitler's conclusions. And that is not to deny Stalin or the others of their proper glory in the same boat.I am not saying that invoking this disjunction between morality and naturalism is a final answer either...I am suggesting you think about it. Some of these things you must see for yourself. It does me no good to declare them, if no-one takes the time to 'digest the offering'. Edited by Rob, : No reason given.Edited by AdminPD, : Warning - Get to the topic

Surprise. It's Rob, and the topic once more is morality rather than what is in the OP ... So how do you explain this to "fundies" ...Of course it was "natural" - nature is neither good nor evil. What Cho did was a result of impulses. The processing of those impulses may have been faulty (chemical or neurological imbalance due to environment, genetics or some combination), but that doesn't make it unnatural.To think that such action is "unnatural" means that there is some non-natural cause ... ie some kind of demonic possession or something similar. This absolves one of looking for cause and effect ... and doesn't lead to any new knowledge or any possible treatment for similarly afflicted people, thus meaning that such experiences will be repeated. From the conceit that we individuals\humans are something special.Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Admin PD puts us back on topic: They should be treated as intellectually impaired by way of indoctrination”the "bicameral-grip syndrome"”and treated firmly, but gently, because their belief fundamentals are brittle and unyielding. It would break them into pieces to have to all of a sudden abandon their ancient dreams of Heaven.”HMEdited by Hoot Mon, : No reason given.

Depends whether you used Nagewaza or Katamewaza. Very subtle difference, not usually mastered by round-eyes. :-p Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

HM:Do you think ancient dreams of heaven are unnatural?If not, why would you mess with mother nature?

It was certainly abnormal, as your adjective 'faulty' recognizes. The word unnatural is a popular (if not very accurate) synonym for the pretty much the same idea.'Faulty' neurological processes are those that do not function as well as we would reasonably expect them to, given the norm of efficiency as it exists in nature.Being 'outside the norm of efficiency as it exists in nature' yields both terms: 'abnormal'(outside the norm) and 'unnatural' (as it exists in nature). A scientist is more likely to prefer 'abnormal' or one of its kindred terms --pathology or disorder--where a lay person might just refer to a phenomenon as unnatural.It's not the most helpful word, as 'nature' means many different things to many people. But this kind of imprecision characterises much popular terminology. The desire to be more precise is why professionals in any field develop jargon. This is a logical sequence of thought, but in standard usage 'unnatural' is not really a synonym for 'supernatural' as you use it here. The popular understanding isn't so literal ('outside of nature'). It's a bit sloppier ('outside the norm as it exists in nature').______Edited by Archer Opterix, : clarity.Edited by Archer Opterix, : html.Edited by Archer Opterix, : clarity

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Human and societal norm?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

rob asks: My dog has dreams”not sure just what of, but they're very animated. Sometimes I think he's chasing squirrels, which is like heaven to him. So, yes, I have empiracle evidence that ancient heavenly dreams are natural.”HM

I intentionally modified 'faulty' with "(chemical or neurological imbalance due to environment, genetics or some combination)" and note that it isn't necessarily {abnormal\un-normal\unusual} but perfectly natural: it happens frequently. Or that function at heightened levels of response that sometimes swamp the ability to process information (ADD, ADHD), OR that just do not function in the same ways every time (chemical inhibition\excitation).The other side of "may have been faulty" is that they may have been functioning properly -- I can't say I know, can you? And if they were functioning properly then that too is natural. versus Synonyms: ... abnormal, ... supernatural, ... unaccountable, ... (of ~50 given)Antonyms: natural, realOF course this gets us back to perceptions of reality ... including Cho's ... and the question of what is "normal" ...Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Not one to be cornered are you?At least your consistent!