Originally posted by everneo
see.. yet to come out of survival of the fittest realm..into civilization..
Depends on whether you're the cannibal or the cannibalized
Originally posted by everneo
see.. yet to come out of survival of the fittest realm..into civilization..
Hi WellCookedFetusOriginally posted by WellCookedFetus
Some people I met on a theology forum claim that there must be a god because if there was not there would be no need for morals and rules and everyone could be bad and kill each other...
Now I'm no theologian (I only go to those site to defend evolution) but I want some advice from some other theologians here about if the above belief is right or wrong?
Originally posted by Kython13
Depends on whether you're the cannibal or the cannibalized
Originally posted by everneo
My point is people out there are driven by the realities than reading and following theories - "genetics survival or at the very least that your memes carry on. "
Originally posted by WellCookedFetus
(cough) "And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons and of they daughters, which the Lord thy God hath given thee, in the siege, and in the straitness, wherewith thine enemies shall distress thee." (Deutoronomy 28:53)
seems like the bible say so?
yep I believe in selfish genetics as the cause of everything and all that some call evil.
Originally posted by Kython13
Which ironically is a theory, your theory. Do you live by the words you write or do you preach what you don't believe?
No offense is inteded, but i just can't help it.
Originally posted by WellCookedFetus
was that a rebuttal or a affirmation?
Originally posted by WellCookedFetus
seems like the bible say so?
Originally posted by Kython13
I don't know anymore. I'm confused now.
What were you saying the bible was saying when you said
Teleology would suffer, "rational reason" [sic] would remain in effect.Originally posted by firefighter
Did you ever think that if an intelligent God (or rational force of some kind) did not pre-exist then there would really be no rational reason for anything.
What is the difference between "rational reason" and "reasonable reason"?Originally posted by WellCookedFetus
What would the side effects of no rational reason for existence be?
Originally posted by ConsequentAtheist
What is the difference between "rational reason" and "reasonable reason"?
I never quite understood this POV. Why is it so important that there is a single, underlying, causative, reason behind everything? I find it a rather futile endeavor. Anyway, even if there were a God to give purpose to the Universe, God herself would have no reason for being. Once again, God is simply a means to move back the question one more step, it answers nothing.Originally posted by firefighter
Did you ever think that if an intelligent God (or rational force of some kind) did not pre-exist then there would really be no rational reason for anything?
What I find so interesting about this statement is that the value judgments you use here are of human origination. Beautiful, complex, orderly; It seems that man is perfectly capable of supplying his own values.The beautiful, complex and yet orderly physical universe that we live in would have come from something "dumb"
What is intelligence that makes it so different from that which is 'dumb'?capable of producing intelligent beings who, with all their intelligence, have trouble understanding their own consciousness and the complex results of the action(s) of the "dumb" thing which they perceive - pretty smart and tricky for being "dumb", huh?
The only thing i could makeout and sure about, in some of Pablo Piccaso's modern art works, is the frame.Originally posted by MooseKnuckle
Fetus-
I see you mentioned Richard Dawkins, I am currently reading The Blind Watchmaker, excellent book. It strives to show how the evidence of evolution reveals a universe without design.
animals have their own morals by nature. immorality is the problem of humans, it seems. and it struggles constantly with that since time immemorial. btw, plants have any such moral thing..?!The "un-moral" would not survive to the extend of moral humans in the scope of natural selection.