Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is Evolution the Work of Satan?
Stephen Push
Member (Idle past 4859 days)
Posts: 140
From: Virginia, USA
Joined: 10-08-2010


Message 59 of 104 (591133)
11-11-2010 8:42 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by GDR
11-11-2010 5:53 PM


Re: Powerful, Wise & Benevolent God?
GDR writes:
It seems to me that it only makes sense if there is something other than just socialization and natural selection involved that leads us to our altruistic views. If that is the case, which of course I do, then it seems reasonable to conclude that whatever or whoever is behind that sense of altruism would hold at least the same level of compassion and caring that we do.
Natural selection and cultural evolution explain -- without the need to invoke a supernatural being -- why humans are sometimes altruistic. I say "sometimes" because humans are also sometimes selfish, callous, and murderous. I see no reason, other than wishful thinking, to give God credit for our better nature while shielding Him from any association with our dark side.
Edited by Stephen Push, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by GDR, posted 11-11-2010 5:53 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by GDR, posted 11-11-2010 8:51 PM Stephen Push has replied

  
Stephen Push
Member (Idle past 4859 days)
Posts: 140
From: Virginia, USA
Joined: 10-08-2010


Message 62 of 104 (591137)
11-11-2010 10:32 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by GDR
11-11-2010 8:51 PM


Re: Powerful, Wise & Benevolent God?
GDR writes:
If there was no dark side then we wouldn't have the free will to choose love, compassion, joy, forgiveness etc. We would simply be robots. God has given us the choice.
Which brings us full circle to my OP, in which I acknowledged that the above answer might arguably explain the need for moral evil but cannot explain suffering caused by natural phenomena.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by GDR, posted 11-11-2010 8:51 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by GDR, posted 11-12-2010 2:12 AM Stephen Push has replied

  
Stephen Push
Member (Idle past 4859 days)
Posts: 140
From: Virginia, USA
Joined: 10-08-2010


Message 68 of 104 (591191)
11-12-2010 11:51 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by GDR
11-12-2010 2:12 AM


Re: Powerful, Wise & Benevolent God?
GDR writes:
I underdstood that which is why I was surprised that you raised the point. I have explained my understanding of the fact that we have natural disasters even though I worship a benevolent creator in earlier posts in this thread.
I focused on the issue of "natural evil" because it is relevant to biological evolution and is the more problematic question for those who believe in a 3OG (omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God). But I don't buy the free will answer to moral evil either. Does the existence of free will require a 3OG to allow 6 million Jews to perish in the Holocaust? Included among those victims were infants who never reached an age at which they could exercise free will. Couldn't a 3OG at least mitigate the worst effects of human evil without turning His creatures into automatons?
Any good parent, granted the powers of a 3OG, could design a better world than the one we have. In a good family, parents don't try to turn their children into automatons. They allow their children to grow intellectually and emotionally and eventually allow them to make their own decisions on progressively more consequential matters. But what would you think of the parent who allowed one child to murder another so that the children could express their free will?
The only other point that I would add is that as a Christian I believe that Christ did suffer and die on the cross and so is very aware and sympathetic when it comes to suffering. Again, with this in mind, I believe that things are the way they are for a good reason that is beyond human understanding, but at the end of time things will be made right.
Having been raised Roman Catholic I have little patience for the "beyond human understanding" response. The priests and nuns would engage their students in what appeared to be a rational discussion of the Faith, but whenever we asked a question they couldn't answer, they would say, "It's a mystery." That has always struck me as a cop out. Of course, we will never understand everything, but why stop trying?
I'm also not inclined to wait for death or the end of time to make things right. Just as "it's a mystery" shortcircuits intellectual progress, talk of the afterlife inhibits the struggle for justice in this life. I suspect this ideology helped keep generations of my Catholic ancestors satisfied with their lives as peasants in Europe. I don't see any reason why we shouldn't try to make things as right as we can now, given that none of us knows what the future will bring.
Edited by Stephen Push, : No reason given.
Edited by Stephen Push, : No reason given.
Edited by Stephen Push, : No reason given.
Edited by Stephen Push, : No reason given.
Edited by Stephen Push, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by GDR, posted 11-12-2010 2:12 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by GDR, posted 11-12-2010 9:05 PM Stephen Push has replied

  
Stephen Push
Member (Idle past 4859 days)
Posts: 140
From: Virginia, USA
Joined: 10-08-2010


Message 71 of 104 (591311)
11-13-2010 1:31 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by GDR
11-12-2010 9:05 PM


Re: Powerful, Wise & Benevolent God?
Thank you for another thoughtful and heartfelt post. I think we share a similar outlook on many issues.
GDR writes:
My conclusion is that we have a benevolent God who had limitations or reasons for creating the world the way that He did.
If there is a God, I hope you are right about His character. Yours is a more appealing conception of God than the alternative.
The only positive out of it is that at least much of the world is horrified by these things. We are repulsed and are amazed that this sort of thing can happen at all. It wasn't that long ago that it was what was expected.
I agree that, at least in some parts of the world, there has been an increase in compassion.
I am convinced that God wants us to be horrified by all suffering, even if it means rejecting Him.
If that is true, He should be pleased by secular humanism. Some of the values of secular humanism, by the way, are derived from Christianity and other religious traditions.
Having said that, it seems to be that through better knowledge of early languages and new sources of material giving us a more complete understanding of the scriptures, and with huge gains in scientific knowledge in all fields including biology, we are making progress in our understanding of the creator and his creation.
Even though I don't share your belief in God, I do share your desire for greater knowledge about both religion and science.
The gospel message is all about trying to make things as right as we can now.
I think you're "right in there with the good guys" too.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by GDR, posted 11-12-2010 9:05 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Otto Tellick, posted 11-13-2010 12:06 PM Stephen Push has replied
 Message 78 by GDR, posted 11-13-2010 7:05 PM Stephen Push has seen this message but not replied

  
Stephen Push
Member (Idle past 4859 days)
Posts: 140
From: Virginia, USA
Joined: 10-08-2010


Message 74 of 104 (591404)
11-13-2010 3:30 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by Otto Tellick
11-13-2010 12:06 PM


Re: Powerful, Wise & Benevolent God?
Otto Tellick writes:
I think it would be more accurate to say that some aspects of Christianity and other religious traditions are consistent with the values of secular humanism. (Some religious traditions have more in common with secular humanism than others.)
I think it goes both ways. Religious traditions have influenced secular humanism and vice versa. For instance, I believe that the tendency in recent history to extend moral respect to those outside one's own group (tribe, nation, etc.) was influenced by the Christian idea that all people are God's children.
Both sides of the coin (the presence and absence of "good senses", and the resulting "good" and "bad" behaviors) are intrinsic to the human condition. This "duality" is logically entailed in the nature of a species that is comprised of sentient individuals whose survival depends crucially on sustaining social structures, at the expense of some normal individual impulses that must be suppressed for the sake of the group.
A moral sense in intrinsic to the human condition, but specific moral codes are the result of cultural evolution.
History, experience and basic logic show us repeatedly why the "good senses" and their resulting behaviors are preferable (because they extend and improve the quality of survival for the group or species as a whole), and why behaviors based on ignorance, selfishness and fear are "bad" (because their "success" is ultimately not beneficial in a broader scope).
Research shows that moral behavior is not as rational as you seem to imply. Moral decisions often are made emotionally, with reason providing post hoc rationalization of what we are inclined to do without conscious reflection.
There is no need to invoke supernatural causation, let alone supernatural guidance, for any of this. It's simply "natural".
I am not invoking supernatural causation. Religion is a natural phenomenon of human behavior.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Otto Tellick, posted 11-13-2010 12:06 PM Otto Tellick has not replied

  
Stephen Push
Member (Idle past 4859 days)
Posts: 140
From: Virginia, USA
Joined: 10-08-2010


Message 79 of 104 (591461)
11-14-2010 8:48 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by GDR
11-13-2010 6:16 PM


Re: Powerful, Wise & Benevolent God?
GDR writes:
However, if we accept the first scenario then I wonder what grounds we have to believe that the moral underpinnings in our lives have any validity. How do we know that there is an absolute right and wrong. How do we know that Hitler was absolutely wrong if our values are completely derived through an unguided evolutionary processes? How do we know that the perpetrators of the many genocides in the last century are immoral. How do we know that the evolutionary processes that made those involved the way they are didn’t bring about the values that we should hold as well?
I think we evolved a moral sense that enables us to develop a moral code that is shaped by our culture. The process is, I believe, analogous to how an innate language ability allows us to develop language skills shaped by the language(s) we grow up hearing.
There are probably some absolutes built in by evolution. All cultures have a prohibition against murder, although each culture determines what consitutes justifiable homicide. All cultures have a prohibition against incest, but each culture determines how distantly related a couple must be to avoid incest.
A small percentage of people are sociopaths, who never develop a normal conscience. In some cases at least, this aberrant behavior may be caused by lesions in the prefrontal cortex. Hitler was probably a sociopath.
What about the people who followed Hitler? In many cases, I think they knew they were wrong. Having a normal conscience doesn't guarantee that we will always follow it. Many Germans to this day impose upon themselves a heavy burden of guilt and shame about the Holocaust.
And what about cultural practices, such as slavery, that were acceptable once but widely abhorred now? Our moral sense first evolved when we lived in small bands or tribes. In those days, our moral concern would have generally been limited to members of our own group. Regardless of whether it started with Christianity, as I believe, we have seen over the last few centuries a trend of widening our circle of moral concern to other groups of people and even to animals.
I don't know if the above paragraphs answer your question precisely. I guess the bottom line is that, without being able to look to religion or scripture for moral absolutes, I have to examine my own conscience and seek guidance from a variety of sources, including people I admire and both humanist and religious literature. It is sometimes a struggle. But isn't it also sometimes a struggle for those who believe in God?
Edited by Stephen Push, : No reason given.
Edited by Stephen Push, : No reason given.
Edited by Stephen Push, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by GDR, posted 11-13-2010 6:16 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by frako, posted 11-14-2010 11:03 AM Stephen Push has replied
 Message 81 by GDR, posted 11-14-2010 11:40 AM Stephen Push has replied

  
Stephen Push
Member (Idle past 4859 days)
Posts: 140
From: Virginia, USA
Joined: 10-08-2010


Message 82 of 104 (591619)
11-15-2010 8:03 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by frako
11-14-2010 11:03 AM


Re: Powerful, Wise & Benevolent God?
frako writes:
The Egyptian faraos often took their sisters as brides and had children whit them.
That’s a good point, but it’s not clear that sibling marriages among the Pharaohs are evidence against incest aversion. Incest aversion occurs among people who have been raised together from a young age. If there was a large age difference or if they had been raised by different wet nurses, no aversion would be expected.
frako writes:
Morals change whit society there is no internal compass bourne in us all.
Even if the incest taboo were not universal, there are multiple lines of evidence that, taken together, suggest we have an innate moral sense:
1) Many religious and philosophical traditions adhere to something similar to the Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.
2) People in different cultures show similar biases when asked about moral dilemmas. For example, most people say they would throw a switch that would divert a train from a track where it would kill five people unto a track where it would kill one person, but they would not push a person in front of the train even if that were the only way to save five people further down on the track.
3) Some forms of moral behavior, such as fairness, are seen in young children.
4) Incipient forms of moral behavior, such as inequity aversion, are seen in non-human primates.
In this thread so far, we have focused on immoral behavior. But most people behave morally most of the time, even when punishment is unlikely. Why is this so, if we do not have some kind of moral sense? Do you believe that every child is a blank slate -- equally likely to become an Albert Schweitzer, an Adolph Hitler, or a completely amoral adult -- depending on the environment?
The romans often watched gladiators kill one another, and the victor was praised. In Albania they still practice blood vengance even if it is now illegal, i kill your son you kill my son, i stab you you stab me back...
Those may have been morally acceptable behaviors in those places and at those times. An innate moral sense can develop into a wide variety of moral systems, just as an innate language ability has developed into a wide variety of languages.
We make that compass whit the help of those around us.
I don't believe we make it from scratch. We develop it with the help of those around us.
Edited by Stephen Push, : No reason given.
Edited by Stephen Push, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by frako, posted 11-14-2010 11:03 AM frako has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by frako, posted 11-15-2010 10:37 AM Stephen Push has replied

  
Stephen Push
Member (Idle past 4859 days)
Posts: 140
From: Virginia, USA
Joined: 10-08-2010


Message 85 of 104 (591714)
11-15-2010 3:19 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by GDR
11-14-2010 11:40 AM


Re: Powerful, Wise & Benevolent God?
GDR writes:
To a large degree I agree with that. But the question remains whether there is an external objective truth about what moral code we should aspire to. The answer to the question is something that brings together all major world religions. It is probably best described using the Buddhist term the "tao". C S Lewis does a wonderful job of writing about it, and here is a brief review of his book, The Abolition of Man
I don’t believe there is any external moral truth. All that saves us from moral relativism is our innate moral sense and the realization that, in an age of nuclear weapons and potential global environmental catastrophe, we will all be better off if we treat the whole human race as if it were our tribe.
I agree that our socialization has a great deal to do with the spreading of a moral code but I see that as part of the divine plan. You and I have already pretty much agreed that we share a common moral code. I believe that we are called to infect others with that moral code simply by putting it into practice in our own lives. Once again we are to go about humbly loving kindness and doing justice. It's infectious.
Humility, kindness, and justice. That sounds like a good philosophy to me. I don’t think it matters whether the motivation is secular or religious.
I remember the sixties with its mantra of "if it feels good do it".
An amusing coincidence: My wife and I attended a revival of the musical Hair yesterday.
I suggest that loving God means to love the attributes of love, mercy, justice, truth, forgiveness etc which I believe flow from Him.
That’s why I believe Christianity is often a positive influence, even for secular humanists.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by GDR, posted 11-14-2010 11:40 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by GDR, posted 11-15-2010 9:15 PM Stephen Push has replied

  
Stephen Push
Member (Idle past 4859 days)
Posts: 140
From: Virginia, USA
Joined: 10-08-2010


Message 86 of 104 (591753)
11-15-2010 7:07 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by frako
11-15-2010 10:37 AM


Re: Powerful, Wise & Benevolent God?
frako writes:
Like the study when 2 storries where compared the one from the bible when a bloke killes every living thing in a city cause he is orderd by god, and a nother storry where the same thing happens only no word from the hebrew god.
Moste anwser the bloke that got the order from the hebrew god did the right thing and the other one was vile and evil.
Can you give me a citation for that study?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by frako, posted 11-15-2010 10:37 AM frako has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by frako, posted 11-15-2010 8:41 PM Stephen Push has replied

  
Stephen Push
Member (Idle past 4859 days)
Posts: 140
From: Virginia, USA
Joined: 10-08-2010


Message 93 of 104 (591867)
11-16-2010 3:18 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by frako
11-15-2010 8:41 PM


Re: Powerful, Wise & Benevolent God?
Perhaps it was Joshua.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by frako, posted 11-15-2010 8:41 PM frako has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by frako, posted 11-16-2010 7:10 PM Stephen Push has replied

  
Stephen Push
Member (Idle past 4859 days)
Posts: 140
From: Virginia, USA
Joined: 10-08-2010


Message 98 of 104 (592446)
11-20-2010 8:59 AM
Reply to: Message 97 by Otto Tellick
11-20-2010 12:22 AM


Re: Powerful, Wise & Benevolent God?
Otto Tellick writes:
If you can't understand how genocide and enslavement (the most extreme forms of win-lose / zero-sum interaction) would ultimately fail in evolutionary competition against incorporation and collaboration (win-win / positive-sum interaction), you just aren't thinking clearly.
While I can see that within group cooperation is probably an evolutionarily stable strategy, it is not a foregone conclusion that cooperation between groups is. Throughout history, conquerors have often been successful at spreading their genes and their cultures. Chimpanzees show a similar pattern. A recent study documented that a band of chimps that engaged in years of brutal combat with a smaller neighboring group has wiped out that group and taken over its territory.
In case I really need to connect all the dots for you: natural selection defines "success" as "growth", "diversification", and "robustness in the face of adversity". Discrimination, enslavement and mass murder are not conducive to success in those terms -- quite the contrary.
The only standard of "success" in biological evolution is how many of your genes you pass on to the next generation. Aggressive war, mass murder, ensalvement, and rape may be human behaviors that have been favored by natural selection.
Meanwhile, the things that your version of Christianity have in common with secular humanism are in fact the things that support that kind of success.
Religious and secular humanism may have to overcome some genetic predispositions -- while reinforcing others -- to create a more humane future.
Let me recommend a book by Robert Wright, called "Non-Zero" -- it explains the perpetual competition between zero-sum and non-zero-sum behaviors, and demonstrates, with evidence, how and why non-zero-sum behavior is the predominant victor. It's far more objective, and more coherent, than any religion-based account of morality I've ever seen.
I've read Wright's The Moral Animal but not Non-Zero. I'll add it to my reading list.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by Otto Tellick, posted 11-20-2010 12:22 AM Otto Tellick has not replied

  
Stephen Push
Member (Idle past 4859 days)
Posts: 140
From: Virginia, USA
Joined: 10-08-2010


Message 99 of 104 (592447)
11-20-2010 9:06 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by frako
11-16-2010 7:10 PM


Tamarin's 1966 Study
frako,
Thank you for the reference. I find it very interesting. It seems to confirm my view that in humans natural selection has tended to support cooperation within groups and competition between groups.
Edited by Stephen Push, : No reason given.
Edited by Stephen Push, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by frako, posted 11-16-2010 7:10 PM frako has not replied

  
Stephen Push
Member (Idle past 4859 days)
Posts: 140
From: Virginia, USA
Joined: 10-08-2010


(2)
Message 100 of 104 (592450)
11-20-2010 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by GDR
11-15-2010 9:15 PM


Re: Powerful, Wise & Benevolent God?
GDR writes:
The question of course is why do we have an innate moral sense and how do we know which moral sense we should listen to.
We have an innate moral sense because it helped our ancestors propagate their genes. There is no external, objective answer to your question about which moral sense we should listen to. But I would submit that in the modern world we will all be better off if we widen our circle of moral concern so that our natural tendency for within-group cooperation applies to the whole human race.
Edited by Stephen Push, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by GDR, posted 11-15-2010 9:15 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by GDR, posted 11-20-2010 2:48 PM Stephen Push has seen this message but not replied

  
Stephen Push
Member (Idle past 4859 days)
Posts: 140
From: Virginia, USA
Joined: 10-08-2010


Message 103 of 104 (592574)
11-20-2010 6:00 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by frako
11-20-2010 3:18 PM


Where Does Morality Come From?
frako writes:
I know it is off topic but it had to be said.
It did. Don't worry about going off topic. We all did that about 30 posts ago.
Edited by Stephen Push, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by frako, posted 11-20-2010 3:18 PM frako has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024