RE: Evolution vs. Religion (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 1:40:46 PM)

quote:

Do you understand what a god concept is? Is specifically IS an alien sentient creature with enough power or technology to effect abiogenesis. Beyond that, if we're talking about a theistic god, we're looking only for an alien sentient being that someone would make themselves subservient to.

More or less agreed

The concept of a god is entirely incoherent from the get-go.

Totally disagree

 




I'm going to take your constructs just a bit farther, if I may. A God may be a spiritual power higher than ourselves. The exact nature of that spiritual power, I am not going to theorize about, since I can't present proof of existence beyond: I've been in touch with a higher spiritual power, so I know it exists.

To me, to not believe in at least the potential of a higher spiritual power is to underrate the vastness of our world. The universe we inhabit is but a tiny speck in that vastness. I, for one, am willing to keep a very open mind about what could be out there. The fact that we have not yet met any alien sentient creatures does not mean they do not exist.

BTW: Personally I lean far more toward evolutionary theory than creationist theory, which is a Christian construct, and not one adhered to by all religions.



NihilusZero -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 1:43:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

The Big Bang Theory is a theory. When you get back to the very start, all one has is theories on either side.

If I see you smiling and, without explanation, say "You're gay!"...what would you think I'm suggesting?

The word "theory" in layman-speak is something entirely different than what it means in the scientific community. Getting drunk one night and conjuring up some plan for how the cosmos began not the same thing as the mathematical structures theoretical physicists are using when discussing string theory.

This is one of the more gross misunderstandings trumpeted out in these kinds of debates.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

There are miracles that science can't explain and others they can. "Does God exist?" is and will always be an unanswered question. Even scientists have things they can't explain.

There isn't much, really. The scope of non-understood things is minuscule nowadays.

Using "miracles" just means that you're describing an event which you happen to find incredulous regardless of the statistical likelihood of it.

The god question is shown to consistently be more widely dismissed in groups that cater towards intellectual and scientific understanding. It's a non-point, anymore. The only fascinating thing about it left is how our species, at this level of modernization, still manages to cling to certain mythological notions so fervently.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

Regardless, if believing brings one peace, if it brings comfort to people in times of need, anyone wanting to destroy that has their own issues.

This is worded a bit confrontationally, but it's actually true.

What you will find from atheists that are vehemently against magical thinking in these sorts of instances is that they have automatically granted "fact" a higher life-priority space than "happiness". This is psychologically unsound. "Happiness" is the only recurringly worthwhile life-currency, even if some people derive it via different paths.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
NZ,

There are literally MILLIONS of people who believe in a higher power and never become "fanatical zealots." An argument against believing for that reason is beneath you.

I think you misunderstood what I meant. I wasn't talking about people being zealots. I was talking about fanatical zealotry as an entity unto itself. I was talking about the mental state. In that case, because religion/spirituality is such a powerful, life-changing, pervasive thing it becomes an easier vehicle for people to become fanatical zealots. This can happen with many types of magical thinking, though.

The belief itself does not lead directly to zealotry and that implication was neither what I intended nor what I think. I hope that clarifies things a bit.



tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 1:49:13 PM)

quote:

Throwing "to you" into a counterargument that relies on reality and logic that is sound does not make the original argument flawed.


I asked for proof, you offered opinion.

quote:


Much as I may wish to fly by flapping my arms, I will do nothing but plummet were I to jump off a 40-story balcony.


Which has been proven over and over again. You offer no proof.

quote:


"Opinion" is to describe conjecture that has no logical basis for viability when the topic has objective traits. Someone arguing for or against the best color...now that's something you can dismiss by claiming it is merely someone's opinion.


It was widely accepted that blood letting was the cure for many diseases.. until scientific proof came along to dispel that myth.

Science is always disproving "proven" theories. And, generally, I agree with most of them. Im still waiting on science to disprove the existence of god. Once it does, then I will accept. For now, I do not believe in god, But I dont have the right to tell someone they dont have the right to believe in that god because I do not have proof he doesnt exist.





NihilusZero -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 1:50:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt

A God may be a spiritual power higher than ourselves. The exact nature of that spiritual power, I am not going to theorize about, since I can't present proof of existence beyond: I've been in touch with a higher spiritual power, so I know it exists.

Actually you have to theorize. It's absolutely necessary because you have to understand the traits and prerequisites that you're talking about when you say "god".

You can't just claim some nebulous "something" exists somewhereh in or outside of the cosmos and then refuse to specify what exactly that something is.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt

To me, to not believe in at least the potential of a higher spiritual power is to underrate the vastness of our world. The universe we inhabit is but a tiny speck in that vastness. I, for one, am willing to keep a very open mind about what could be out there. The fact that we have not yet met any alien sentient creatures does not mean they do not exist.

It's actually relatively likely there are other sentient creatures in the universe (statistically speaking). That's the whole point. The concept of a "god" is a hypothetical alien we've never met who we assume has vast power beyond our current means (which changes from era to era. You could be a god if you went back in time 200 years with currently technology).

One reason why it remains so powerful an idea is because it can do no wrong. You know all those relationship advice columns that tell you to see someone as who they are not as who you imagine them to be? Same thing, except with a metaphysical issue.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt

BTW: Personally I lean far more toward evolutionary theory than creationist theory, which is a Christian construct, and not one adhered to by all religions.


There is no creationist theory, actually. I mean than in complete earnest. It doesn't exist. "Creationism" is the act of finding conceivably believable "holes" in something and using that as the case to support a position that has none on its own.

It's like me talking to a girl who's just had a fight with her boyfriend and saying: "See? That is exactly why you should be fucking me!"



liks2plzlf -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 1:52:52 PM)

Not to anyone in particular, but those who replied to me.The Bible predicted in the last days the Jews would come from the four corners of the world, and settle in the land he promised Abraham. May 14 1948. They would be an immovable rock, they are. Jerusalem would be there capitol, it is. Jerusalem would be a problem for the world it is or will be. They would be hated through out the world, they pretty much are. Next he will provide more poof, when a massive army attacks Israel and get curshed. How much proof do you need?



NihilusZero -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 1:54:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Science is always disproving "proven" theories. And, generally, I agree with most of them. Im still waiting on science to disprove the existence of god. Once it does, then I will accept. For now, I do not believe in god, But I dont have the right to tell someone they dont have the right to believe in that god because I do not have proof he doesnt exist.

I think you misunderstand the purpose of science. It doesn't care what anyone believes (except when doing anthropoligical studies). It just presents the most stout explanation of reality available by means of logical, verifiable, and repeatable ideas and/or studies.

If that explanation doesn't make sense to some people, I'm going to say it's due to ignorance (because, again, it's been shown that a higher familiarity with science and intellectual endeavors correlates to sizeably lower instances of theism).



tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 1:56:32 PM)

quote:

If that explanation doesn't make sense to some people, I'm going to say it's due to ignorance (because, again, it's been shown that a higher familiarity with science and intellectual endeavors correlates to sizeably lower instances of theism).


And yet many scientists were religious.



ChatteParfaitt -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 2:00:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero


quote:

ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt

A God may be a spiritual power higher than ourselves. The exact nature of that spiritual power, I am not going to theorize about, since I can't present proof of existence beyond: I've been in touch with a higher spiritual power, so I know it exists.

Actually you have to theorize. It's absolutely necessary because you have to understand the traits and prerequisites that you're talking about when you say "god".

Yes I know.

You can't just claim some nebulous "something" exists somewhereh in or outside of the cosmos and then refuse to specify what exactly that something is.

It really doesn't matter what *I* perceive it to be. It's my perception, nothing more. When you are talking spiritual entities, you can easily dismiss me as a crazy lady and say what I have experienced is all in my head. *I* don't believe that's true...but you know very well NZ, it's impossible to prove a negative. 


quote:

ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt

To me, to not believe in at least the potential of a higher spiritual power is to underrate the vastness of our world. The universe we inhabit is but a tiny speck in that vastness. I, for one, am willing to keep a very open mind about what could be out there. The fact that we have not yet met any alien sentient creatures does not mean they do not exist.

It's actually relatively likely there are other sentient creatures in the universe (statistically speaking). That's the whole point.

Yes I know that is the whole point you were making, this is why I used your quotes.

The concept of a "god" is a hypothetical alien we've never met who we assume has vast power beyond our current means (which changes from era to era. You could be a god if you went back in time 200 years with currently technology).

One reason why it remains so powerful an idea is because it can do no wrong. You know all those relationship advice columns that tell you to see someone as who they are not as who you imagine them to be? Same thing, except with a metaphysical issue.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt

BTW: Personally I lean far more toward evolutionary theory than creationist theory, which is a Christian construct, and not one adhered to by all religions.


There is no creationist theory, actually. I mean than in complete earnest. It doesn't exist. "Creationism" is the act of finding conceivably believable "holes" in something and using that as the case to support a position that has none on its own.

It's like me talking to a girl who's just had a fight with her boyfriend and saying: "See? That is exactly why you should be fucking me!"



DomKen -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 4:32:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: liks2plzlf

Not to anyone in particular, but those who replied to me.The Bible predicted in the last days the Jews would come from the four corners of the world, and settle in the land he promised Abraham. May 14 1948. They would be an immovable rock, they are. Jerusalem would be there capitol, it is. Jerusalem would be a problem for the world it is or will be. They would be hated through out the world, they pretty much are. Next he will provide more poof, when a massive army attacks Israel and get curshed. How much proof do you need?

Stuff not couched in absurdly obscure language in a book with at best very poor bona fides.



tweakabelle -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 5:07:46 PM)

quote:

NihilusZero
The belief itself does not lead directly to zealotry and that implication was neither what I intended nor what I think. I hope that clarifies things a bit.


I'm not totally convinced this is an accurate way of rendering the relationship between absolute belief systems and zealotry.

Whether any absolute belief will lead to zealotry or not is for mine, a question of probability. Given a sufficiently large sample, absolute beliefs will generate zealotry in some individuals in all cases. Whether the belief system is theistic or otherwise is irrelevant, what's crucial is its claim to be the absolute truth.

It may be that a certain psychological make up is a pre-requisite for this to occur (eg. a certain level of insecurity, reliance upon a denial mechanism to prevent category crisis etc). A rough analogy would be the way certain biological states pre-dispose an individual to certain diseases, tho the condition requires a further, even external trigger to become active.

Any given group of humans will interpret a given belief system in diverse ways. Given a a large enough group, a zealous interpretation of an absolutist belief system becomes an inevitability.



tweakabelle -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 5:25:18 PM)

quote:

ChatteParfait
There is no creationist theory, actually. I mean than in complete earnest. It doesn't exist. "Creationism" is the act of finding conceivably believable "holes" in something and using that as the case to support a position that has none on its own.

It's like me talking to a girl who's just had a fight with her boyfriend and saying: "See? That is exactly why you should be fucking me!"

[sm=goodpost.gif] [sm=mademyday.gif][sm=cute.gif]
[sm=flowers.gif]



tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 5:27:53 PM)

That was actually NZ who posted that, tweak.



tweakabelle -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 5:33:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

That was actually NZ who posted that, tweak.

OMG my baaaaad! Thanks tazzy for pointing that out and giving me a chance to correct things.

Apologies to NihilusZero and Chatte for my error.

I stand by the sentiments of the post - IMHO NZ's post is spot on - even if I can't get who wrote it right! [:D]



gungadin09 -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 5:36:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
According to creationism, God created everything. According to evolution, everything evolved from a single cell. If evolution is true, then why didn't every cell continue to evolve? Why did frogs not continue to evolve? What stalled a shark's evolution?


Belief in God doesn't necessarily preclude belief in evolution. You can believe that God created the world through evolution.

But proponents of evolution believe that life (frog, shark, and human) DOES continue to evolve. If not, ask yourself why you have an appendix.

pam



HannahLynHeather -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 5:36:16 PM)

quote:

Any given group of humans will interpret a given belief system in diverse ways. Given a a large enough group, a zealous interpretation of an absolutist belief system becomes an inevitability.
i agree 100%. just look at me, for example. [;)]

hannah lynn



dcnovice -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 5:41:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

I was taught evolution by a Catholic priest in a Catholic high school, so I don't see a clash between evolution and religion.


Let's be honest here.

What the Catholic schools taught was a bastardized version of evolution in which God is the guiding hand behind it.



Honestly, rule, in AP Bio I don't recall God's coming into it at all.

Eta Then again, that was thirty years ago--sigh--so my recollection may be faulty. Some days I'm not sure which I miss more: my memory or my hair.



ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 6:19:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: gungadin09


quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
According to creationism, God created everything. According to evolution, everything evolved from a single cell. If evolution is true, then why didn't every cell continue to evolve? Why did frogs not continue to evolve? What stalled a shark's evolution?


Belief in God doesn't necessarily preclude belief in evolution. You can believe that God created the world through evolution.

But proponents of evolution believe that life (frog, shark, and human) DOES continue to evolve. If not, ask yourself why you have an appendix.


It's also important to note that the theory of evolution does not even attempt to address the question of where life came from in the first place - only how it developed once it began. It's a common fallacy for people to argue from the perspective that the two schools of thought conflict with or contradict each other, but  the fact is they do not. Evolution vs. intelligent design would be the more accurate opposition.

Edit: Oh, and as for the appendix? Turns out that's not the evolutionary anachronism it was long held to be. Apparently it serves a very useful purpose after all. It appears to be a sort of repository for intestinal bacteria, a "safe house" for the microorganisms in your gut. If you ever suffer an illness that causes the bacteria in your intestines to die off, the colony that resides in your appendix may survive, and repopulate the digestive system.



LafayetteLady -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 6:58:28 PM)

Here in my town, there is a little boy (personally met family) who was diagnosed with an inoperable brain tumor. Parents were told he had no more than 6 months to live. SCIENCE said he would die. His parents went to a local church (for which I am not a member and have never attended) and with the parishoners, prayed for their sick little boy.

Of course, that was two years ago, and that boy is cancer free, no sign of the tumor, and continues to bring joy to his parents because he IS.

Miracle? I don't know. But SCIENCE, those intellectual, non religious folk with all their knowledge condemned this child to die. He didn't. Power of positive thinking? Yep, science has shown that positive thinking can aid the healing process. Perhaps this boy, having so much positive energy surrounding him was healed by great amounts of positive thinking. I don't know. What I know is science admitted defeat and said they couldn't save this boy, but this boy is alive.

There are otheer documented instances of such things. I used this one because I personally met the family. And before anyone asks, not it wasn't at some revival meeting, it was at a community event in my town.



gungadin09 -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 7:06:22 PM)

i don't understand why people sometimes seem so anxious to make a war between science and religion.

pam



ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/19/2011 7:08:53 PM)

Sometimes people get lucky. If you want to give god credit for saving the boy's life, how do you account for all the dead children he didn't save?



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875