|
creationism vs evolution (pg. 9)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| astroboy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
Well what's your basis for a perfect theory? A quaint and complete little notion that we were made in 7 days and dinosaurs were put on Earth to test our faith? Yeah, put a ing ribbon on it, it's done. This is essentially a battle between faith and science - the difference is that science can become more complete and can develop - faith shall always remain the same fragile little trinket, shattered by a moment of reasonable doubt. |
This conflict only arises if you presuppose that scripture has a place in trying to answer scientific questions. This is an assumption that seems true for many in the US. Most religious people I know here are happy to accept science and let religion help them with their spiritual/moral questions, which are outside the realm of science. The very fact that there are places where this conflict between science and faith (which most enlightened people - religious or not - have left in the renaissance) even exists is sickening to me. |
|
|
| wotyzoid |
| One thing that still puzzles me is if there was no intelligent design then why is our species the only known rational one? |
|
|
| Nrg2Nfinit |
i was recomended to read this
The Science of God - Dr. Gerald Schroeder
any opinions. sounds like hogwash to me
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7143844201875642538 |
|
|
| Capitalizt |
| quote: | Originally posted by wotyzoid
One thing that still puzzles me is if there was no intelligent design then why is our species the only known rational one? |
The universe is a big frakkin place and our little corner of existence is ridiculously insignificant..
proof: http://tranceaddict.com/forums/show...5&forumid=16&s= |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by astroboy
This conflict only arises if you presuppose that scripture has a place in trying to answer scientific questions. This is an assumption that seems true for many in the US. Most religious people I know here are happy to accept science and let religion help them with their spiritual/moral questions, which are outside the realm of science. The very fact that there are places where this conflict between science and faith (which most enlightened people - religious or not - have left in the renaissance) even exists is sickening to me. |
Yeah, I have noticed that, too. The US has a very unfair population of dinosaur-denying jew-drinkers, obviously. I think it really reinforces the virulence of religious thought though - there's no logical reason people have to believe in the the things they do, especially when they counter modern scientific practices and theories, yet they try to apply faith to something that can be clearly observed otherwise. I'm not even saying there is no God or something - how the would I know? - it's just that people of this ilk tend to automatically assume science and religion are naturally at odds when really, it's their own inability to think for themselves that has lead to any argument whatsoever - and why do they go through the effort? Because they were raised that way. Same reason they're religious, too. Fetch. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by wotyzoid
One thing that still puzzles me is if there was no intelligent design then why is our species the only known rational one? |
Our species is rational? By whose terms? |
|
|
| Ygrene |
| Can I just go ahead and call it evolutionism? |
|
|
| wotyzoid |
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
Our species is rational? By whose terms? |
LOL I don't think anyone can deny that we are much more advanced than anything else living know to us. But fair enough, rational is a loose term. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by wotyzoid
LOL I don't think anyone can deny that we are much more advanced than anything else living know to us. But fair enough, rational is a loose term. |
I think there's several million years of biological evidence to suggest that advancement is a temporary state. We are animals and animals have ways of making sense of their world to the furthering of their collective survival. If we are savage to one another, it is because nature has deemed that culling is in order. If we are peaceable, it is because nature has deigned that cooperation is of more worth. Is this 'intelligent'? Well, intelligence is something we only value in the individual - what if it actually meant nothing whatsoever? |
|
|
| astroboy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
I think there's several million years of biological evidence to suggest that advancement is a temporary state. We are animals and animals have ways of making sense of their world to the furthering of their collective survival. If we are savage to one another, it is because nature has deemed that culling is in order. If we are peaceable, it is because nature has deigned that cooperation is of more worth. Is this 'intelligent'? Well, intelligence is something we only value in the individual - what if it actually meant nothing whatsoever? |
Well we're the first species (on this planet) to have the ability to destroy the planet.. that's gotta count for something right?
Seriously though I think if we don't kill ourselves or have a huge war that reverts us to the Middle Ages then we will progress to true mastery of the natural forces over the next couple of centuries. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| The fact that we have oceans that are completely unexplored, yet still wage our stupid wars over like sand and God is pretty inexcusable. |
|
|
| Chimney |
| quote: | Originally posted by astroboy
Well we're the first species (on this planet) to have the ability to destroy the planet.. that's gotta count for something right?
Seriously though I think if we don't kill ourselves or have a huge war that reverts us to the Middle Ages then we will progress to true mastery of the natural forces over the next couple of centuries. |
Kinda doubt that. We have become so dependent of the new technology that all of us do not advance, only a minority of academic elitists that create this advanced technology for the everyday Joe. So as we evolve we lose our instincts, just imagine a world without electricity and computers. How long would we manage to survive in such an environment?
There are people that manage to "master nature" to a certain degree, however we as a species will never manage to do it because as technology evolves, and we need it more, we lose our natural instincts and refuse to have an open mind about certain elements. We simply jade ourselves from the natural aspects and see everything through a pair of superficial eyes. |
|
|
|
|
