What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Where does everyone stand in regards to...

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #241
and, keyboards
 
  • #242
Yes, I'm glad you posted that. I think that one's much worse than top-down thinking and you can see its negative influence in just about every social problem I can think of. Avoiding falling into that trap would be a crucial part of everyday mental self-discipline. Without it online forums would get 1/4th the traffic, but I think that's a sacrifice worth making.
smile.gif
 
  • #244
I'm reading through Yahoo News as I'm going through forums, and I just hit an article full of top-down thinking.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm....gion_dc

A few tectonic plates shift as they have thousands if not millions of times in Earth's history. You would think geology would be explanation enough, but when using top-down thinking all sorts of semi-related unreconcilable mental conflicts start to appear.

And if you want to bring this ingroup-outgroup bias into the mix
smile.gif
... enemies of those regions would easily start to conclude very confidently that God was punishing those "wrong/evil/lesser" people. If the earthquake had occurred in the Middle East I have no doubt I'd be hearing this from people in my neighborhood even.

Meanwhile the simple shifting of plates is the status quo in billions of worlds in the universe and will continue to go on as usual whether there are victims of it or not.

And I feel I have to add this because I know what will happen if I don't. I'm in no way demeaning the suffering of the victims of this event. It's a horrible thing to experience... and pain is a wretched thing no matter what causes it and no matter who experiences it. I sincerely hope those people can find a way to bring happiness and success into their lives again.

I understand in my posts I haven't been addressing evolution/creation directly very often... but I have been addressing the philosophy of conclusion-making... which makes all the difference when examining either side of the argument. I support evolution because when looking at both sides epistemologically, it holds up pretty well (there will always be unanswered questions) while arguments against it don't.
 
  • #245
its not the whole story,



compedetiveness, pride, agression, hormones and sex all play, to a greater or lesser extent, a part in that. Compedetiveness and pride play the biggest roles
 
  • #246
heh. I was listening to a radio talk show and these people called saying it was a punishment from god and stuff... yeah right. crazy extremists.
speaking of the tsunami (NOT tidal wave)
http://www.cnn.com/2004....ex.html
some extremists would say that that's proof god was punishing US and that he favors animals.
funny how people will turn ANYTING into proof of anything... or use things for political debates or something.
 
  • #247
I decided to start learning a little about politics this year, and quickly discovered I just couldn't stomach it. The political world is an unabashedly unsound place when it comes to logic and conclusion-making. So few people in politics seem to see any value in intellectual accountability... I don't get it. The fact that they have so much influence in the workings of the world scares me.
 
  • #249
There is one issue I would like to address, having been brought up by some of my friends. No doubt several of you have seen hyprocracy and abusive things done by people, in the name of the church or Chrsitianity. Please fon't blame God or institutions. The blame belongs to our species and, as what FTG referred to, as our sinful nature. Even the most well-meaning, well-respected Christians have an inward battle or struggle. Even though some Christians appear to have their acts together - outwardly - they have an on-going battle with their sinful nature. Those people of faith, exercise their faith by continually reading the Bible, learning from other other Christians, and praying to God for forgiveness (confession) and turn away from their sin (repentance).

High profile people like Jim Bakker & Jimmy Swaggart, who have been an incredible embarrassment, eventually humbled themselves before God, asked forgiveness, and received it. They DID pay for the consequences of their sin, as ought be expected. I do not defend their respective sin that got them in trouble, but I DO commend them for turning to God to turn their lives around. That, at least, they have in common with the Christians who have the inner struggle, but don't do anything nearly as obviously heinous. But what about the rest of the people? Since they do not coose to come before God, their unbridled thought life and behavior goes unchecked. those people, in extreme cases, are your Hitlers, Idi Amins, Saddam Hussein, and Osama bin Laden. This isn't "religion". This is sinful nature, manifested in ruthless ambition, totally apart from putting one's faith in God. God isn't telling them to do anything. They are telling themselves to do their atrocities. God isn't the one to blame. Humans are.
 
  • #250
very true.
I wasn't talking about the actual religion but what it makes some people do.
If people lived by the morals and stuff (the major religions anyway) religion taught, there wouldn't be evil.
ALDOUGH! some institutions DID do bad things... maybe not now, but they DID do them.
 
  • #251
One of my favorite quotes in the world is, "There's nothing more dangerous than a fool with a cause."

If you consider just how many fools there are out there (ourselves probably included, being ever human) a lot of the silliness in the world makes a lot of sense. Part of the intellectual self-discipline I was talking about includes being very very careful about the causes you choose, and being very very careful about how you carry them out. It's scary how easily ego, tunnel vision, and narcissism can invisibly worm their way into the actions of driven people. "What we want" becomes "what I want", but it unfortunately retains the false label of selflessness in the person's mind. It's one of the creepier forms of self-deception, I think.

Incidentally, I was reading about ingroup/outgroup bias online (no one had attached a name to it for me before) and came across this page:

http://sun.science.wayne.edu/~wpoff/cor/grp/prejudic.html

You'll like what it says about "Group Attribution Error", jimscott.
smile.gif
 
  • #252
I'd like to ask this to all the creationists and religious people: what if the bible is fake? It was made by men and they could of easily made the whole thing up. On the contrary we have physical proof which we can use to back evolution up. What do you have that can back up the "fact" that the bible is real other than quotes from the bible itself?
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]And to those of you who keep calling religion evil, i say you are the ignorant, evil people, since you do not respect peoples rights and can only site a few instances where religion has been misused to base your accusation on
Maybe you're a fool for beliving something that was written by man.
 
  • #254
I won't accept a quote from the bible. i want proof that the information in it is sent from our creator. Faith isn't an answer either.

If you want me to give you physical proof and facts that evolution is a true, i can give it to you. There is so much that i could be posting here all night.
 
  • #256
): Yes, I DID appreciate Group Attribution Error

John: I was an atheist at your age, with the same demand for definitive proof. I never got it. I DID, however, get evidence that absolutely required faith. Nobody can produce definitive proof, nothing that couldn't be explained way or rationalized. Faith is a choice one makes after assimilating what is before them. If you want to choose to have faith, then the facts before you will be adequate, even with doubts. If you want to choose to reject the evidence, there will never be anything to satisfy you.

Luis: Interesting site. I was looking for hay fever. Didn't see it.
 
  • #257
yeah, he's also missing a couple of things I would put in there... like the fact that malaria has a vestigial chloroplast
and the 13th rib which some people have (8% actually).... chimps and gorillas have it.
what's hay fever? :p
 
  • #258
I will not argue this, there is nothing to argue and it appears to be keeping fairly friendly.  Good for you.

I believe in God.  It takes faith, that's the point.

As far as proof, again, it takes faith, that's the point.  If you wonder what I mean by that, read the bible.  If you have and still do not understand, you missed the point.

Now, Darwinism.  You know he never said we came from apes or that apes would be like us someday (if that were so we should have seen something of it by now).  He said we came from the same branch.  This may be.  Who am I to say how God did it.  Also, they never found the missing link, no proof.  As a matter of fact the theories keep changing on how we did come into creation because they're that, theories.  There is not enough proof and a lot of assumptions.  To believe in evolution you must have faith in that belief.

I to doubted when young, and yet lacking in a grasp of my on mortality.  I can not tell you why I believe.  It would take too long and I think you have to live it.  But, I more than believe, I know.  For me he reached down to the depths of the human sewer and pulled me out.  He gave me a life far happier than what I was heading for and one that I did not know existed beyond Donna Reed.  

What does he ask of me, Be good to others.  I try to do my best, but being human I sometimes I fail.

I hope you all had a good Christmas.
 
  • #259
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Also, they never found the missing link, no proof. As a matter of fact the theories keep changing on how we did come into creation because they're that, theories.
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]There is not enough proof and a lot of assumptions
doesn't ANYONE read the 25 previous pages???
smile_n_32.gif

we are talking about SCIENCE here. a SCIENTIFIC theory means something COMPLETELY different than regular english "theory"
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]If you are skeptical by nature, unfamiliar with the terminology of science, and unaware of the overwhelming evidence, you might even be tempted to say that it's "just" a theory. In the same sense, relativity as described by Albert Einstein is "just" a theory. The notion that Earth orbits around the sun rather than vice versa, offered by Copernicus in 1543, is a theory. Continental drift is a theory. The existence, structure, and dynamics of atoms? Atomic theory. Each of these theories is an explanation that has been confirmed to such a degree, by observation and experiment, that knowledgeable experts accept it as fact. That's what scientists mean when they talk about a theory: not a dreamy and unreliable speculation, but an explanatory statement that fits the evidence.
http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0411/feature1/index.html
please... It's very frustrating having to repeat myself so much in the same thread.
 
  • #260
and what do you mean there's not enough proof???
here- http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html
note there are more pages.
what else do you want? god coming down and saying "evolution is real, that's how I allowed for change to happen with life as I allowed for change to happen with the earth"
confused.gif

How can anyone dismiss ALL of that evidence? everything points to evolution.
There's 26 pages. They're not just there to make this look like a long thread.
on the same link is this about humans http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs....tes_ex3
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top