Enmos
Valued Senior Member
So that's a no.. great.
From the thread I gather that you actually think that is the case.
Besides, those were questions based directly on what you said in the post before that.
Do atheists believe in survival of the fittest?
- Thread starter S.A.M.
- Start date
So that's a no.. great.
From the thread I gather that you actually think that is the case.
Besides, those were questions based directly on what you said in the post before that.
Frankly, I cannot understand why you keep asking such questions. I clearly posted the definition of survival of the fittest that I use. I also discussed with James that I believe that it is used as a metaphor for natural selection and is inadequate in that respect. Also you keep harping on evolution after I have repeatedly stated that I am not discussing evolution. So your questions show either that you are not reading the posts or that you are incredibly obtuse.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
"you rambled on about evolution, while I used the standard definition of survival of the fittest"
Are you saying that "Survival of the fittest" has nothing to do with evolution ?
"which effectively ruled out natural selection as anything more than a metaphor"
Are you saying that natural selection is merely a metaphor ?
I think these are valid questions, since you made those statements.
Are you saying that "Survival of the fittest" has nothing to do with evolution ?
"which effectively ruled out natural selection as anything more than a metaphor"
Are you saying that natural selection is merely a metaphor ?
I think these are valid questions, since you made those statements.
Yeah, I do not think natural selection is a competition for predominance.
Darwin used survival of the fittest as a metaphor for natural selection
And have already been covered.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Do you think that evolution is a competition for predominance ?
No, in that case "Survival of the fittest" is the metaphor.
You said that "Natural selection" is a metaphor.
I see I miswrote the statement there: it should read "which clearly rules out its use for natural selection as a metaphor"
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Its a stupid question. I've already disengaged survival of the fittest from natural selection.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Oh ? Seems like the logical question to ask though
Can you just answer it ?
S.A.M. said:
Enmos said:
S.A.M. said:
Enmos said:
Oh ? Seems like the logical question to ask though
Can you just answer it ?
I've already answered it. And no, its a completely illogical question :crazy:
Evolution has no direction.
btw, I'm putting you on ignore. Sorry.
Last edited:
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
why not?
adaptations are geared towards ensuring the organism persists
plants and animals alike have evolved strategies for survival
could it not then be said evolution has a direction?
is there a particular perspective you employ when asserting the contrary?
I mean it has no direction towards betterment, there is no goal of dominance.
Its a conjunction between environmental stressors and "adaptations" as determined by a combination of inherited traits, genetic drift, mutations and reproductive potential. Whats ideal in one environment can be lethal in another.
Unless you believe in design.
I don't trust her, she's still replying to my posts..
Don't be silly, as a mod I cannot actually put you on ignore. I don't need a button to tell me which posts I don't want to read.
Try to remember, Enmos, when dealing with the indoctrinated, one must understand they are living in a one-dimensional universe, encapsulate completely by their gods. Many questions asked will have no meaning for them as a result.
The 'direction' is climbing up Mount Improbable.
Go and read about evolution and you'll see that it has a much wider definition.
You ask a question about atheists " who do not believe in Creationism and ID " As I keep suggesting, your question is absurd. When you have found an atheist who does believe such nonsense, I'll talk to him.
Last edited: