Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]
God and Science/Republicans and Bush
    #6269881 -

I happened to make this comparison after watching Rush Limbaugh admit, for the past six years, he's been lying about supporting Bush because "the stakes were so high"; but now he doesn't have to lie anymore because of the Democratic majority. Now, despite whether or not that makes sense, (I don't think it really does), I thought this was very similar to support of religious people to obviously ridiculous concepts like Intelligent Design (mostly the belief that the earth is 6,000 years old part).

It just made me wonder if, while saying these logically defiant statements, religious people are akin to the Republicans over the past few years (secretly cursing the fact they have to support such a silly position).

I'm not sure, but the two seem to have a lot in common. The amount of self deception in our society today just troubles me...


--------------------
No question is so difficult to answer as that to which the answer is obvious.

Meow.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: MycoCat]
    #6269901 -

And if anyone is religious (not spiritual) and doesn't think they practice self deception every day...you're wrong.


--------------------
No question is so difficult to answer as that to which the answer is obvious.

Meow.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: MycoCat]
    #6269919 -

Haha yeah, intelligent design is kinda rediculous


--------------------
"What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?"

"Belief is a beautiful armor
But makes for the heaviest sword"
- John Mayer

Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin.

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: MycoCat]
    #6269948 -

MycoCat said:
And if anyone is religious (not spiritual) and doesn't think they practice self deception every day...you're wrong.


We all practice self deception at times but your point is valid.

Did Rush actually say that? What a dildo! :rofl2:


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: dblaney]
    #6269950 -

Given all the things that can go wrong with the human body, I call it Stoopid Design.  :tongue:

:dunce:
:braindamage:


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Diploid]
    #6270116 -

:lol: :thumbup:



--------------------
"What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?"

"Belief is a beautiful armor
But makes for the heaviest sword"
- John Mayer

Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin.

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: MycoCat]
    #6270553 -

Quote:
Intelligent Design (mostly the belief that the earth is 6,000 years old part)


I suggest reading up on intelligent design before making such ridiculous claims. Intelligent Design != Young Earth Creationism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Silversoul]
    #6270668 -

Are you advocating intelligent design or just suggesting that the poster better inform himself?


--------------------
"What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?"

"Belief is a beautiful armor
But makes for the heaviest sword"
- John Mayer

Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin.

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: dblaney]
    #6271041 -

dblaney said:
Are you advocating intelligent design or just suggesting that the poster better inform himself?


I mean exactly what I said. Nothing more.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Silversoul]
    #6271451 -

That's fine, but I didn't really understand what you meant, which is why I asked for clarification.


--------------------
"What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?"

"Belief is a beautiful armor
But makes for the heaviest sword"
- John Mayer

Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin.

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: dblaney]
    #6271541 -

I was simply trying to clear up a common misconception about intelligent design. Many people on both the evolution and creation side have the misconception that it is basically the same thing as creationism, which is not true. Intelligent design is a model of evolution which says that certain features of biology cannot be explained by natural selection, and are best explained by an intelligent cause. It doesn't deny evolution. It merely complements it.

As for my personal feelings on intelligent design, they are mixed. I think it gets a bad rap because of its association with the religious right, and I don't think it's as ridiculous as people make it out to be. However, I also don't think it's truly scientific, as it's not falsifiable. Even so, I think that many researchers in the ID crowd have done a thorough job at finding problems with the current evolutionary model, and even if their alternative is not taken seriously, I think that the objections they raised should be considered and addressed by the scientific community.

I'm not a fan of the current "Selfish Gene" model of evolution, either. I think it's a very narrow-minded way of looking at evolution, being overly reductionist and deterministic. It basically says that we are our genes, and that it is the universal unit of selection. I think there is plenty of reason to believe that selection also occurs at the cellular, individual, and group level, and even higher taxonomic levels. I also think that Lynn Margulis' work on symbiogenesis has shown that evolution is as much about cooperation as it is about competition.

On the subject of intelligent design, my main objection to it is theological, not scientific. I just don't think that's how God works. I don't believe in a "God of the gaps." I think that God is the Ground of Being, from which everything springs. God is not some mechanic who tinkers with his creation every once in a while. God is always present and active in every moment.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Silversoul]
    #6271729 -

It doesn't deny evolution. It merely complements it.

Intellegent design proposes that organisms are too complex to have been created by natural causes. This seems to contradict the very premise of biological evolution (The premise being: Organisms evolved due to natural causes.)

I'm not a fan of the current "Selfish Gene" model of evolution, either. I think it's a very narrow-minded way of looking at evolution, being overly reductionist and deterministic.

Evolutionary theory has been reductionistic and deterministic since Lamarck. The gene-centered paradigm of biological evolution didn't cause this. Plus, it seems a hellova lot less "narrow minded" than the organism-centered paradigm. Most evolutionary theorists since Darwin had a gene-centered view of evolution (Mendel, Hunt, etc), but nobody articulated this until Richard Dawkins. Things such as Genetic drift, mutations, altruism, empathy, recombination, etc are all much easier to discuss using the gene-centered model. The only reason the organism-centered paridigm existed is because for a long time genes were nothing but theoretical entities.

I think there is plenty of reason to believe that selection also occurs at the cellular, individual, and group level, and even higher taxonomic levels.

Huh? Those are all phenotypes.

Edited by MushmanTheManic (11/11/06 11:39 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: MycoCat]
    #6271743 -

The amount of self deception in our society today just troubles me...

I think most of the people expressing irrational religious beliefs really do believe them and are unable or unwilling to understand anything else... whichs seems even more troubling.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: MushmanTheManic]
    #6271772 -

Quote:
Huh? Those are all phenotypes.


Selection acts on phenotypes...

I agree with everything else you say though.


--------------------
"What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?"

"Belief is a beautiful armor
But makes for the heaviest sword"
- John Mayer

Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin.

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: MushmanTheManic]
    #6271777 -

MushmanTheManic said:
Intellegent design proposes that organisms are too complex to have been created by natural causes.


No, it says that certain features of organisms are too complex to be explained by natural selection alone.

Quote:
I'm not a fan of the current "Selfish Gene" model of evolution, either. I think it's a very narrow-minded way of looking at evolution, being overly reductionist and deterministic.

Evolutionary theory has been reductionistic and deterministic since Lamarck. The gene-centered paradigm of biological evolution didn't cause this. Plus, it seems a hellova lot less "narrow minded" than the organism-centered paradigm. Most evolutionary theorists since Darwin had a gene-centered view of evolution (Mendel, Hunt, etc), but nobody articulated this until Richard Dawkins. Things such as Genetic drift, mutations, altruism, empathy, recombination, etc are all much easier to discuss using the gene-centered model. The only reason the organism-centered paridigm existed is because for a long time genes were nothing but theoretical entities.


Certainly genes are important to evolution. I'm not denying that. It's the premise that natural selectiong can all be reduced to genetics that I object to. Look at the red-footed booby and the blue-footed booby. The different colors of their feet have nothing to do with their genes reacting to the environment. Some boobys preferred mates with red feet while others prefered mates with blue feet, so they evolved into different species due the preferences of the individuals. In this case, the unit of selection was the individual organism, not the genes.

Quote:
I think there is plenty of reason to believe that selection also occurs at the cellular, individual, and group level, and even higher taxonomic levels.

Huh? Those are all phenotypes.


So?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: dblaney]
    #6271791 -

Selection acts on phenotypes...

Phenotypes cannot be inherited.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Silversoul]
    #6271802 -

The different colors of their feet have nothing to do with their genes reacting to the environment. Some boobys preferred mates with red feet while others prefered mates with blue feet, so they evolved into different species due the preferences of the individuals. In this case, the unit of selection was the individual organism, not the genes.

The individual organism doesn't get passed on to future generations though, the genes for red or blue feet do.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: MushmanTheManic]
    #6271805 -

Was it genes that caused homo habilus to make tools? What I'm saying is that an organism can make decisions which will affect their evolutionary course. Sometimes a behavioral change precedes a genetic change.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Silversoul]
    #6271846 -

Quote:
Was it genes that caused homo habilus to make tools?


Early man's genes allowed him to have a brain capable of intelligence complex enough to make and use tools.

Quote:
What I'm saying is that an organism can make decisions which will affect their evolutionary course.


Evolution deals with changes in the genetic structure of a population, not an individual organism.

Quote:
Sometimes a behavioral change precedes a genetic change.


This is sometimes true, but I don't see where you're going with this.


--------------------
"What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?"

"Belief is a beautiful armor
But makes for the heaviest sword"
- John Mayer

Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin.

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: MushmanTheManic]
    #6271852 -

MushmanTheManic said:
Selection acts on phenotypes...

Phenotypes cannot be inherited.


Sure they can. Say two individuals homozygous for blue eyes mate. Notwithstanding a mutation, their offspring will have blue eyes, which is a phenotype, and which was inherited.


--------------------
"What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?"

"Belief is a beautiful armor
But makes for the heaviest sword"
- John Mayer

Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin.

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Silversoul]
    #6271863 -

Was it genes that caused homo habilus to make tools?

I'd say that behavior developed because of the interaction between genes and the environment. Genes don't "cause" a behavior, but I guess you could say they lay the groundwork for them.

What I'm saying is that an organism can make decisions which will affect their evolutionary course.

:yesnod:

Sometimes a behavioral change precedes a genetic change.

If by this you mean behaviors can determine whether a gene gets passed on, then I agree. If you mean a behavior can change a gene, then I'd have to accuse you of Lamarckism (and spit at you and do all sorts of other nasty things.  :crazy2:)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: MushmanTheManic]
    #6271872 -

Quote:
If you mean a behavior can change a gene, then I'd have to accuse you of Lamarckism (and spit at you and do all sorts of other nasty things. :crazy2:


:lol:

Technically speaking though, behavior can change a gene. Say, if you decide to ingest some mutagenic substance.


--------------------
"What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?"

"Belief is a beautiful armor
But makes for the heaviest sword"
- John Mayer

Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin.

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: dblaney]
    #6271878 -

Well shit... I guess ya got me there.  :doh:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: MushmanTheManic]
    #6271880 -

I guess my main beef is what I see as a trend towards genetic determinism. What I was trying to point out with the homo habilus example is that free will can play a role in evolution. I don't think that genes can decide to make tools. They can only provide the brain which has the potential to be used that way(but is by no means destined to do so).


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Silversoul]
    #6271899 -

Silversoul said:
Was it genes that caused homo habilus to make tools? What I'm saying is that an organism can make decisions which will affect their evolutionary course. Sometimes a behavioral change precedes a genetic change.


Impossible. The genetic change must precede the behavioral change, otherwise the organism has no potential for behavioral change. The behavior can then be passed down socially (and another factor comes into play: social Darwinism) but the genetic changes must occur first.

After all the prerequisite genetic changes allowing a behavioral change have evolved, then this may affect which organisms survive in the environment as opposed to before the behavioral change, but it is still entirely the genes that are undergoing natural selection. Dawkins has not been logically contradicted by any proof yet to my knowledge, and it's unlikely that the gene-centered view of evolution is going to be refuted. It may be elaborated, just as the gene-centered view of evolution was an elaboration on Darwinistic evolution, but there are no logical inconsistencies or evidence that would seem to contradict it.


--------------------
So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: dblaney]
    #6271914 -

dblaney said:
Quote:
If you mean a behavior can change a gene, then I'd have to accuse you of Lamarckism (and spit at you and do all sorts of other nasty things. :crazy2:


:lol:

Technically speaking though, behavior can change a gene. Say, if you decide to ingest some mutagenic substance.


Yet that behavior has resulted as a potential given to the organism by its genetics and the environment that acts upon the genetics. If the DNA is changed by mutagenic substances, exposure to radiation, etc. then the new genes will be subjected to the process of natural selection, just like it would have occurred otherwise except at a slower rate without these catalysts.

No one's disputing there's a relationship between behavior and genetics, or that behavior given to the organism by its genetics therefore affects the future natural selection processes upon that species. But it all begins and ends with the genetics- the organism itself, its habitats, its social structure and its behavior are all a bridge for the evolution of the genes.


--------------------
So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: MycoCat]
    #6274195 -

yeah, the genes evolved so much and far, that it is possible for our organisms to reach the spiritual plane, the plane of choice and more.
At this moment, some other, reflective factors come into play to influence evolution. Like our free will.
Now the question is, did the genes purposefully evolve into that direction ?
Imho, that is so for a big sure. Building more complexity, fiddling the rules out of this by reduction to stabilize, then building more complexity and then reduce again, again and again.
With humans, these factors, called memes these days have gotten ahead of plain genetic evolution, but on base level these genes are of course mainly that what supports and sustains our existence and in the long run those genes can be demolished by the back reflection of the memes (like destroying the biosphere by destroying natural life support).


--------------------
Though lovers be lost love shall not  And death shall have no dominion
......................................................
"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."Martin Luther King, Jr.
'Acceptance is the absolute key - at that moment you gain freedom and you gain power and you gain courage'

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: BlueCoyote]
    #6275060 -

BlueCoyote said:
Now the question is, did the genes purposefully evolve into that direction ?


This brings up another issue I have with evolution as it's taught today. In science textbooks, it's common to describe evolution as "purposeless," which seems highly speculative to me. Such a claim is not falsifiable, and therefore not scientific.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Silversoul]
    #6275096 -

Such a claim is not falsifiable

Of course it's falsifiable. All you have to do to falsify it is find evidence of the designer. :shrug:

Stating that evolution proceeds along a design is what's not falsifiable and therefore not science.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Diploid]
    #6275100 -

Neither claim is backed by scientific evidence, and therefore it is not proper science to make a claim either way.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Silversoul]
    #6275111 -

But the claim that evolution is designerless is part of the theory. It's subject to falsification by the finding of evidence of evolution's design, and so it is fair game.

Not so for ID.

Edit: I think it would be fair to say, though, that the designerless claim is more conjecture than theory but it's arrived at by a careful analysis of the available evidence and the intuition of those whose life work is the study of this evidence. Because of this, it's fair to lend it more weight than mere conjecture.

In areas of study where I'm not an expert and not certain about an issue, I defer to experts, especially when it is the case that those experts are in almost-unanimous agreement.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Diploid]
    #6275133 -

Just to clarify, my complaint was not that evolution was claimed to be "designerless," but rather the claim that it was "purposeless."


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Silversoul]
    #6275151 -

Aren't the two synonymous? How can you have a design without a purpose?

I suppose you can have a purpose without a design, but that's anthropomorphizing evolution. You could say that a hammer's purpose, once dropped, is to fall, but that's anthropomorphic. Hammers just fall when dropped, nothing more.

Evolution just happens when 100 or so elements exist in the presence of a couple dozen universal constants. No design, no purpose.

Now, if you want to argue that the 100 elements and the finely tuned constants are designed, well, that's another thread and WAY more all-encompassing than just the tiny phenomenon of evolution in the grand scheme of things.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Silversoul]
    #6275157 -

purpose- The object toward which one strives or for which something exists; an aim or a goal.

Evolution is purposeless, because natural selection acts only random mutations. To say evolution has purpose would mean life would need to evolve towards a certain direction with foresight of the future, and this is obviously impossible. The mechanisms of evolution exist only in the present environment, and life itself follows only the motif of "Survival of the fittest"- meaning that evolution cannot act towards anything in the future, but exist only in the present environment of the organisms.


--------------------
So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Ravus]
    #6275163 -

Praise for your excellent post. :wink:


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Icelander]
    #6275176 -

The Zen Buddhists and Taoists seem to only emulate evolution, don't they? That must be where the human presentist mindset comes from.

I see you like to mock the quotes in my signature, eh?


--------------------
So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Ravus]
    #6275191 -

Ravus said:
The Zen Buddhists and Taoists seem to only emulate evolution, don't they? That must be where the human presentist mindset comes from.


I'm curious about this statement, could you elaborate on what you mean?


--------------------
"What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?"

"Belief is a beautiful armor
But makes for the heaviest sword"
- John Mayer

Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin.

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: dblaney]
    #6275210 -

I mean that, just as natural selection acts only in the present environment as it cannot hold regard for the future, so too do Taoists and Zen Buddhists realize that they must focus their mind entirely on the present in meditation. It is the same present affecting both, and neither can truly look ahead to the future, because purposes are, after all, abstract and impossible to know. Why they cannot/ decide not to look ahead to the future are, however, different, because natural selection is a process, not a consious entity. That is why I said they emulate evolution, because you can only emulate the process of existing and changing in the present without the possibility of knowing the future, yet the consciousness of human beings mindfully in the present distinguishes them.


--------------------
So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Ravus]
    #6275360 -

Ah okay then, well said.

:smile:


--------------------
"What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?"

"Belief is a beautiful armor
But makes for the heaviest sword"
- John Mayer

Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin.

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Ravus]
    #6275672 -

no purpose in nature an life ?
:what:
Maybe I am living on another planet, but to bring aware consciousness into living organisms seems quite the strongest purpose of evolution of life ever seen.
All around I look and see purpose, represented by cause and effect, and even meaning, represented by cause.
If one lets evolution play for some hundred thousand or million years on any organism in a most complex environment, I am sure it evolves aware consciousness.


--------------------
Though lovers be lost love shall not  And death shall have no dominion
......................................................
"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."Martin Luther King, Jr.
'Acceptance is the absolute key - at that moment you gain freedom and you gain power and you gain courage'

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: BlueCoyote]
    #6276444 -

I didn't say no purpose in life; I said no purpose in evolution. The process of evolution is the process of some organisms dying and others surviving simply based on the mutations in their genetics. Do you think a process like this has a purpose that is to bring awareness and consciousness to life? That cannot be logically valid, because it is the organisms dying that form the process itself, unless you believe that organisms kill themselves off just to make future life more conscious or aware than it currently is.

I don't know whether life always forms consciousness and awareness, because as of now there is no scientific way to test that. It isn't unlikely that life evolving in a similar environment to earth will form more and more complex nervous systems in order to respond to the environment in a more sophisticated manner, but whether this would always lead to self-consciousness or whatnot is extremely debatable. The conditions on earth were very unique to form Homo sapiens sapiens in its modern form.


--------------------
So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Ravus]
    #6278596 -

Ravus said:
I didn't say no purpose in life; I said no purpose in evolution. The process of evolution is the process of some organisms dying and others surviving simply based on the mutations in their genetics. Do you think a process like this has a purpose that is to bring awareness and consciousness to life? That cannot be logically valid, because it is the organisms dying that form the process itself, unless you believe that organisms kill themselves off just to make future life more conscious or aware than it currently is.


:smile: No, evolution is for those living, not for those dying or allready dead:)

Quote:
I don't know whether life always forms consciousness and awareness, because as of now there is no scientific way to test that. It isn't unlikely that life evolving in a similar environment to earth will form more and more complex nervous systems in order to respond to the environment in a more sophisticated manner, but whether this would always lead to self-consciousness or whatnot is extremely debatable. The conditions on earth were very unique to form Homo sapiens sapiens in its modern form.


I hear you. You say, evolution only brings self aware consciousness to humans, because they are the best adapted organism here on earth ?
I have to chew on that a bit :grin:
That would include our cause to deprive other lifeforms from that evolutionary step ?

Maybe it is the opposite and we are here to help other lifeforms to master this step and then learn from each other on perspectives of universe through communication :laugh:
At least I more like this 'idea' :smile:
:heart:


--------------------
Though lovers be lost love shall not  And death shall have no dominion
......................................................
"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."Martin Luther King, Jr.
'Acceptance is the absolute key - at that moment you gain freedom and you gain power and you gain courage'

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Diploid]
    #6278734 -

Diploid said:
Edit: I think it would be fair to say, though, that the designerless claim is more conjecture than theory but it's arrived at by a careful analysis of the available evidence and the intuition of those whose life work is the study of this evidence. Because of this, it's fair to lend it more weight than mere conjecture.


The designerless claim is only arrived at through the analysis of available evidence IF you make certain assumptions about the designer to begin with.

However, if you make no assumptions about the designer whatsoever, it is impossible to prove one way or the other.

There is no evidence that evolution isn't simply the most efficient method for achieving whatever it is the end of goal of the design is. Since we don't know the tools and methods that a potential designer may have had access too, nor the end goal, it is impossible to say anything about the nature of the designer.

Now, many scientists call this a "cop-out" because, as I've already stated, it cannot be proven or tested one way or the other.

That might not make it "science" but that doesn't make it wrong either.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Economist]
    #6278773 -

Quote:
There is no evidence that evolution isn't simply the most efficient method for achieving whatever it is the end of goal of the design is.


A) You assume that there is, in fact, some sort of 'end goal'

B) Natural selection does not have any goal when it operates. It simply means that in a given environment, those organisms who are best suited to survive in that environment are more likely to survive in that environment than other organisms who are not as well adapted.

Quote:
Since we don't know the tools and methods that a potential designer may have had access too, nor the end goal, it is impossible to say anything about the nature of the designer.


In this sentence you make several presuppositions: first, that there IS a designer. Second, that such a designer has an end goal. Third, that he uses tools and methods. Clearly, the latter two follow from the first. It seems to me that those who advocate the existence of some designer, for whatever reason, be it insecurity or doubt or whatever, feel as though humans are or should be above other animals, and justify this egotistical desire by claiming that some metaphysical designer exists and has some goal to which humans are so far the closest manifestation of.

If this isn't anxious superstition then I'm not really sure what is. There is no evidence whatsoever to support this argument and there are quite a number of facts that support the other viewpoint: evolution by means of natural selection.


--------------------
"What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?"

"Belief is a beautiful armor
But makes for the heaviest sword"
- John Mayer

Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin.

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: dblaney]
    #6278812 -

It's sad how closed-minded you become, and how quickly.

This isn't about right or wrong, it's about possibilities. Stop trying to shove everyone into the "creationist" box.

For all we know, life on earth, the process of evolution, could be a source of entertainment for an Intelligent Designer. This existence might be someone's equivalent of pay-per-view boxing. Create the conditions necessary for life, and treat yourself to a multi-billion year slugfest.

In this scenario, the end goal is external to the system. That is, evolution takes place, and serves an end goal, but does not drive us towards a pre-mapped destination.

I'm not saying that's what's going on, but we can't prove that it isn't.

All the facts about evolution by natural selection don't matter if a Designer's process IS natural selection.

You're assuming, for whatever reason, that randomized survival of the fittest cannot achieve some cosmic goal. That simply cannot be proven. The reverse can't be proven either, or course, but that makes it no more wrong.

PS - You REALLY need to take some time and understand people who are truly religious. It may make you feel superior to lable them as "insecure" or "doubtful", but that doesn't make it true.

Many people who are truly religious just believe that the world is beautiful enough to be worshipped, that it is a work of art which should be appreciated like any other.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Economist]
    #6278864 -

It's sad how closed-minded you become

Is your argument so weak that it can't stand without name calling?

Please argue the points presented and keep the ad hominems to yourself, or post in OTD where name calling isn't against the rules.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Economist]
    #6279111 -

If you will replace 'religious' with 'spiritual', I will feel much more comfortable :smile:


--------------------
Though lovers be lost love shall not  And death shall have no dominion
......................................................
"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."Martin Luther King, Jr.
'Acceptance is the absolute key - at that moment you gain freedom and you gain power and you gain courage'

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: Economist]
    #6279611 -

Quote:
It's sad how closed-minded you become, and how quickly.


See Diploid's post please.

Quote:
This isn't about right or wrong, it's about possibilities. Stop trying to shove everyone into the "creationist" box.


Well yes, okay, you're right, it IS possible that there is a flying spaghetti monster after all. Silly me! :wink:

With respect, I'm not trying to shove anyone in any sort of box. I'm merely responding to what you said. If you feel as though you're in a box, perhaps you put yourself there?

Quote:
For all we know, life on earth, the process of evolution, could be a source of entertainment for an Intelligent Designer.


You've got a very active imagination, which is a wonderful thing, but I would suggest trying to use rationality to discern fact from fiction. It is possible that there is some deity or being outside of our known universe. But it seems very unlikely, as there has never been any evidence or indication of this. Rather there have only been humans trying to console themselves by imagining that there is some omniscient being who will deliver justice and bring them to some egoic paradise after death. In Brave New World, by Huxley, the people all take little vacations from reality with a drug called soma. Soma is symbolic of religion.

Quote:
This existence might be someone's equivalent of pay-per-view boxing. Create the conditions necessary for life, and treat yourself to a multi-billion year slugfest.


It MIGHT be. Then again, metaphysically speaking, there are A LOT of mights. I don't claim to know what's going on. I can only use logic and rationality to reason which claims are likely and which are unlikely.

Quote:
I'm not saying that's what's going on, but we can't prove that it isn't.


An argument based on something that can't be proven either way isn't much of an argument, to be honest. You may want to consider just focusing on reality here and now rather than concerning yourself with abstractions and metaphysics which are ultimately unknowable to us.

Quote:
All the facts about evolution by natural selection don't matter if a Designer's process IS natural selection.


Natural selection does not follow a design. An Intelligent Designer and natural selection seem to me to be mutually exclusive.

Quote:
You're assuming, for whatever reason, that randomized survival of the fittest cannot achieve some cosmic goal.


I don't understand how the cosmos could have a goal or a purpose. Goals and purposes are human imposed ideas and conceptions. Take an atom. An atom does not have a goal or a purpose. It simply is, and changes with reality. What I'm getting at is that teleology is subjective and imposed by a human being. It is not inherent in nature.

Quote:
PS - You REALLY need to take some time and understand people who are truly religious. It may make you feel superior to lable them as "insecure" or "doubtful", but that doesn't make it true.


It does not make me feel in the least superior to anyone. And I am not labeling anyone, either. I am rather speculating as to possible causes or reasons why certain people behave the way they do. Please don't become defensive.

Quote:
Many people who are truly religious just believe that the world is beautiful enough to be worshipped, that it is a work of art which should be appreciated like any other.


Many people who aren't truly religious feel the same way. And many of the people that you are referring to are actually rather hypocritical. They say they appreciate nature yet they continue to seek dominion of it and use it for their own selfish ends.


--------------------
"What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?"

"Belief is a beautiful armor
But makes for the heaviest sword"
- John Mayer

Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin.

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: God and Science/Republicans and Bush [Re: MycoCat]
    #6282314 -

There are indeed correlations between being a republican and religiousity, as well as between religiousity and creationism.

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=223

http://skeptic.com/the_magazine/featured_articles/v12n03_are_religious_societies_healthier.html


Of course that correlation itself does not prove causation.


--------------------


"Both liberty and equality are among the primary goals pursued by human beings through many centuries; but total liberty for wolves is death to the lambs" -- Isaiah Berlin

Edited by FrenchSocialist (11/14/06 12:49 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Niestche, Bush, and Christianity. nugsarenice 1,080 11 08/29/02 04:17 PM
by Anonymous
* Thou shalt have no other gods before Me
( 1 2 3 all )		 falcon 3,888 41 09/16/03 01:17 PM
by gnrm23
* Do You Believe In God?
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )		 EffedS 7,044 92 09/08/03 09:58 AM
by Clover
* Do u Believe, in an unconditional loving God ?
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 lucid 11,260 74 09/25/03 05:08 PM
by ska8ball
* Religion and God
( 1 2 3 all )		 RandalFlagg 4,309 40 09/19/03 01:49 PM
by Clover
* why you should believe in god
( 1 2 3 all )		 2Experimental 3,422 47 09/21/03 02:00 PM
by fireworks_god
* If God really wants us to believe in him...
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Baby_Hitler 5,191 74 05/06/03 12:35 AM
by Deiymiyan
* The Absurdity of God
( 1 2 3 all )		 silversoul7 3,938 40 12/11/03 08:20 PM
by bumski

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
3,707 topic views. 0 members, 335 guests and 36 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.045 seconds spending 0.012 seconds on 16 queries.