|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 65/40 Hour: 1/5 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evolutionary superiority | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hill Billy Member (Idle past 5382 days) Posts: 163 From: The hills Joined: |
In another thread Nator stated
The only thing any of us have to go on here is what we read, you know. This is a very exiting moment for me because....I agree. I have read a great many posts here and one thing has become very clear. Evolutionists feel superior. They value education above all else and because they have education their positions have more value, their words have more value, even their Kwikie Marts are better. (Nator,from this thread.)http://EvC Forum: And what do you do? -->EvC Forum: And what do you do? I moved into specialty food retail and have done cashier, floor sales, buying, professional tasting, instruction and training, merchandising and consulting. I currently do all of these things for a small specialty grocery in a small New England town with a lot of tourist activity. That evolutionists feel more valuable is not in question, I mean from only one thread http://EvC Forum: Anyone else notice this pattern? -->EvC Forum: Anyone else notice this pattern? I gleaned all this from Nator. I don't care if you think I'm condecending. (I believe thats condescending. You know, spell check.)
I do not deny that I am coming right out and saying that Riverrat's command of the english language is inferior. (This said while others were stating they understood Riverrat just fine.)
I just don't care if someone is offended over the course of a debate Pretty clear, no? In the same thread Rahvin asks,Do you honestly expect anything other than a condescending tone when explaining for the hundredth time information taught in Junior High science classes to a Creationist who just won't get it? and says, When speaking from a position of superior knowledge of science to one whose proficiency in that arena is less than that of a teenage child and Such a position is completely insane. The position is written so clearly that even a hillbilly with absolutely no reading comprehension exam scores to wave around can understand. Evolutionists feel they have more value as people. It seems that evolutionists come here to debate motivated by a desire to crush their opponents and wallow in their superiority, while creationists come to debate out of a sincere concern for our souls. After all, is it not written that " Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all living." Genesis 3:20. That might suggest some sort of value equality, all fruit of the same tree so to speak. To state it like a hillbilly would: The city slicker thinks of the farmer " uneducated trash. " The farmer thinks of the city slicker " Poor bastard don't know his ass from a hole in the ground." In the aforementioned thread I posted this,
Creationists think they know God.Evolutionists think they know everything. It may be as simple as them believing that because they understand something, they understand everything.I'm not sure but it comes across the screen as a sense that they feel more valuable as people because of their education.I wonder where this type of attitude could lead. So the questions are: 1. How did evolutionists come to the conclusion that they are more valuable people? (My guess is through some sort of empiricism or imperialism or something.) And perhaps more importantly: 2. What might the future implications of this trend be? (I'd say things don't look so good for the evolushun of us hillbillies.) Coffee? Anyone? Edited by Hill Billy, : cause I can "Some people spout bullshit just to hear their own heads rattle" Grampa Frame.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3319 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
Well, of course I feel superior. I'm quite a sexist, you know, so I know I'm better than women. I'm quite a racist, you know, so I know I'm better than black people. I'm quite a homophobe, so I know I'm better than gay people. I'm quite a christian, you know, so I know I'm better than everybody else who's not a christian in the world.
So, now that we have settled one issue, what's next?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hill Billy Member (Idle past 5382 days) Posts: 163 From: The hills Joined: |
Taz! There you are.
Well, of course I feel superior. Yes, your writings would suggest that.
I'm quite a sexist, you know, so I know I'm better than women. I'm quite a racist, you know, so I know I'm better than black people. I'm quite a homophobe, so I know I'm better than gay people. I'm quite a christian, you know, so I know I'm better than everybody else who's not a christian in the world. Is this sarcasm? Are you offended that I recognize that you feel superior? Or are you actually going to take the position that you don't?
So, now that we have settled one issue, what's next? Well, you didn't actually deal with either of my two questions. 1. How did evolutionists come to the conclusion that they are more valuable people? Keep your stick on the ice. And perhaps more importantly: 2. What might the future implications of this trend be? "Some people spout bullshit just to hear their own heads rattle" Grampa Frame.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
Hill Billy writes: 1. How did evolutionists come to the conclusion that they are more valuable people? The problem here is that you have concluded that evolutionist beleive they are 'more valuable' people. There is quite a difference in 'knowing more about a particular subject' and being 'more valuable'. I would confidently imagine that Nator knows a great deal more about ponies than I (even though I grew up with them and have many years of experience with crazy skittish beasts) because of her systematic education. I'm equally confident that I know more about psychology than her (even though her hubby would have inevitably exposed her to psychological ideas and concepts) because of my systematic education. Does either dictate 'greater value'? I think not. I would go as far to ask you why you infer 'value' from differing levels of education? My education far outstrips that of my father but this does not lead me to conclude I have greater 'value'. Surely we are all of equal value?
Hill Billy writes: What might the future implications of this trend be? Better to ask the implications of a world where people (such as you have in this thread) ascribe 'value' as opposed to education.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
I find your air of superiority and condescension concerning people classified by one single (vaguely descriptive) word to be insulting.
Enjoy. by our ability to understand RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5900 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Although I don't particularly want to discuss the two questions you posed at the end of the OP (mostly because I think they're specious along the lines of "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?"), I hope you'll indulge my curiousity on something.
In this and at least one other thread you have voiced a complaint about the "condescending" attitude of "evolutionists". You also appear to link this attitude to level of education. That little quip about the stereotypical farmer (apparently all farmers are uneducated boobs in your book while all educated people are idiots with no "real world" experience or ability), seems to define your viewpoint. In fact, you have gone rhetorically far out of your way - nearly to the point of absurdity - in proclaiming yourself uneducated (in spite of your obvious command of the language), I guess to distance yourself from those "educated idiots". So my questions are these: 1. What do you have against education in general, and education in the life sciences (especially, apparently, evolutionary biology) in particular (if that is in fact the case)? 2. Why do you feel that an advanced level of knowledge in a particular subject - whatever that may be - is somehow wrong? Or is your argument specifically against education in the life sciences? 3. Do you really believe that ignorance of a particular subject is somehow more desirable than in-depth knowledge of it - the basics of which are usually gained from education? If so, is the expressed belief in your posts derived from some personal experience that led you to this conclusion? If not, what is the point you are attempting to illustrate with this self-evidently vacuous rhetorical device (because, to be honest, whatever point you are trying to convey is to me very obscure)? I'm genuinely curious as to your answer. I simply don't understand what you are trying to accomplish here.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pelican Member (Idle past 5014 days) Posts: 781 From: australia Joined: |
ironic aint it -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I find your air of superiority and condescension concerning people classified by one single (vaguely descriptive) word to be insulting. What was the word again, Razd? I must have missed it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pelican Member (Idle past 5014 days) Posts: 781 From: australia Joined: |
In another thread Nator stated The only thing any of us have to go on here is what we read, you know. Hi Hill billy, glutton for punishment rh? still they are only words. The quote above : isn't that what the creationists say? I thought Nator was an evolutionist?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3319 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
I responded your rant with a rant. Isn't that what this thread is about? Random rants from deep down years of anger from oppression? Frankly, I'm sick and tired of seeing women in positions of power. I'm also sick and tired of black people being treated as equal. They ain't no equal to me. The bible specifically says that women should STHU in the church. I mean, doesn't anyone care about god's laws anymore?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hill Billy Member (Idle past 5382 days) Posts: 163 From: The hills Joined: |
Larni,you state
The problem here is that you have concluded that evolutionist beleive they are 'more valuable' people. Problem? Yes, I suppose for those who don't wish to face that side of themselves it would be troublesome. I arrived at this conclusion after carefully examining the evidence, (Many thousands of evolutionist posts on this forum). Perhaps you are suggesting that my interpretation of the evidence is incorrect. Care to refute? After all, I did provide some examples. There is quite a difference in 'knowing more about a particular subject' and being 'more valuable'. Yes,I see you understand my position.I would confidently imagine that Nator knows a great deal more about ponies than I (even though I grew up with them and have many years of experience with crazy skittish beasts) because of her systematic education. I would wonder if this confidence is well placed.We know she got the degree. We don't know if she learned anything.We do however,know that you have learned something. I grew up with them and have many years of experience with crazy skittish beasts
I'm equally confident that I know more about psychology than her (even though her hubby would have inevitably exposed her to psychological ideas and concepts) because of my systematic education. This seems a stronger base for your confidence , cause you seem much more careful about the personal information you reveal to all of us. Does either dictate 'greater value'? I think not. I think not too.I would go as far to ask you why you infer 'value' from differing levels of education? I would go so far as to ask you where you got the idea that I do infer "value" from differing levels of education. I am suggesting, no stating, that evolutionists do "infer" value from differing levels of education. I provided evidence to back this claim. I can provide even more if you wish to attempt to refute what I already brought.The writing is on the wall so to speak.Surely we are all of equal value? Surely you are correct. I believe I covered this in the OP,remember, me, quoting scripture and all. Clearly you didn't comprehend what I wrote. Perhaps you didn't actually read it. I state clearly that evolutionists feel they are more valuable people. Seems the real trouble here is that the hillbilly can see it. "Some people spout bullshit just to hear their own heads rattle" Grampa Frame.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
I am suggesting, no stating, that evolutionists do "infer" value from differing levels of education. Naturally, possessing a high level of education has high value in the market place - those with higher education are, in general, given higher waged jobs. There is demand for higher levels of education. Though also, there is value in experience. So one might consider that in general someone with a degree and 5 years work experience is more valuable to the market than someone who dropped out of high school and sat around watching Oprah for 15 years. So if evolutionists believe, as you claim, that they are more valuable people - who or what do they think are they more valuable to?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hill Billy Member (Idle past 5382 days) Posts: 163 From: The hills Joined: |
Razd,
I find your air of superiority and condescension concerning people classified by one single (vaguely descriptive) word to be insulting. I find your lack of the characteristics described above quite refreshing. Enjoy. It's no fun gettin painted with the same brush as your associates. As an aside, I do often enjoy, though often you go way over my head. "Some people spout bullshit just to hear their own heads rattle" Grampa Frame.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
What was the word again, Razd? I must have missed it. Ironic. The whole end of one thread was taken up by you and hill billy protesting some apparent superiority, and now hill billy has started a thread on it. I'll just sit here quietly and Enjoy. Edited by RAZD, : . by our ability to understand RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
jibbery jobbery joop.
Edited by Jon, : No reason given. Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hill Billy Member (Idle past 5382 days) Posts: 163 From: The hills Joined: |
Although I don't particularly want to discuss the two questions you posed at the end of the OP Can't say as I blame ya. (mostly because I think they're specious along the lines of "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?") Mmmm, ok.In this and at least one other thread you have voiced a complaint about the "condescending" attitude of "evolutionists". You also appear to link this attitude to level of education. That little quip about the stereotypical farmer (apparently all farmers are uneducated boobs in your book while all educated people are idiots with no "real world" experience or ability), seems to define your viewpoint. Class, class! Ok, the point of the story is that while the city slicker displayed disdain toward the farmer, the farmer displayed concern toward the city slicker. Get it?In fact, you have gone rhetorically far out of your way - nearly to the point of absurdity - in proclaiming yourself uneducated (in spite of your obvious command of the language) Hang on here! Are you suggesting that I'm bullshitting about my lack of education? Thank you so much for proving my point.I guess to distance yourself from those "educated idiots". This is to easy, it must be a trap.1. What do you have against education in general, and education in the life sciences Absolutely nothing.especially, apparently, evolutionary biology) in particular (if that is in fact the case)? It ain't.2. Why do you feel that an advanced level of knowledge in a particular subject - whatever that may be - is somehow wrong? What?Or is your argument specifically against education in the life sciences? Apparently a bunch of you all had the same reading comprehension teacher. My position is clear. Evolutionists feel superior. You proved it by suggesting I may have more education then I claim. 3. Do you really believe that ignorance of a particular subject is somehow more desirable than in-depth knowledge of it That, my brother, would depend totally on the subject matter. I can think of plenty of things I already know way too much about. what is the point you are attempting to illustrate with this self-evidently vacuous rhetorical device That you seem to use a lot of big words to impress yet you struggle over the meaning of the little ones.(because, to be honest, whatever point you are trying to convey is to me very obscure)? Yes, I see that. Thank you for your honesty. I hope I was able to help. "Some people spout bullshit just to hear their own heads rattle" Grampa Frame.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024