Comment

Comment by A3Kr0n on June 2, 2011 at 12:04am

So who's winning here tonight? (to paraphrase Charlie Sheen). Has anybody been to the "slap down" at the Christian Watershed, and Joel's comment about PZ Myers? I read a couple of other posts Joel made, and I need a play book. I'm not looking to start a rant with him though. He might be a "hopeless". Maybe I just need one of those strings people use when spelunking to find my way back out.

Comment by mike larson on June 1, 2011 at 11:40am

Mike k: that is the fundamental problem when discussing someone's belief in a scientific world. evidence continues to outstrip the "wishful thinking" reasoning.
people put such powerful attributes to their feeling.

Comment by mike larson on May 31, 2011 at 7:33pm

When dicussing creation (universe) and its vastness. IE, if the world is only 6 to 7 thousand years old according to the bible, but light from distant stars can take thousands if not millions of years to reach earth. This of course throws a wrench in the bible timeline. But I've heard theists respond that "god" created all things and light at once so from the first instant of creation light from distant stars hit was hitting the earth.
anyone face this one?

Comment by mike larson on May 31, 2011 at 4:09pm

Religion ties in morality as a way of glossing over the intolerance, violence that theists inevitably garner from their "holy books".

Comment by Joseph P on May 31, 2011 at 3:03pm

Well, we already knew that.  :-D  What we're trying to do is explain why to the hopelessly brainwashed.

Comment by mike larson on May 31, 2011 at 1:36pm

So bottom line morality exists independent of religion.

Comment by Joseph P on May 31, 2011 at 10:02am

That's one possible definition for a complex moral system, yeah, but there are far simpler.

Comment by Joseph P on May 31, 2011 at 9:32am

It's all of the little things that pack species share.  It's the sense of fairness, the desire to assist others, often as a sort of reciprocal arrangement.  The moral sense that humans have is just a memetically evolved version of that.

Comment by Joseph P on May 31, 2011 at 9:11am

There are points to be made about the cats killing things for the hell of it.

 

First off, cats are not truly social animals.  The closest example I can think of, in the wild, is lions.  That's not even a real pack group, just a harem group.  If a new male defeats the old one and takes over the harem, the new one kills the cubs of the old male.  They don't have the same sort of pack mentality as ... say, dogs, dolphins, other whales, and most primates.

 

Then there's the fact that morality only really applies to group members.  Wolves have morality that applies to their pack, but they're predators.  Small animals and even larger prey animals are free for the killing.  That's what wolves do.

 

Some of the same will carry through to dogs.  They may kill a small animal, just for the hell of it, because of latent hunting instincts.  But any animal within their pack is treated fairly, most of the time.  Sometimes they'll try to get away with things, though.  Some people are just jerks.  It makes sense that the same would hold true for animals.

Comment by mike larson on May 31, 2011 at 12:37am

Mike K: Good, Similar to saying anyone growing up in a religion anywhere in any time believes in their diety. I grew up in a non-religious household, never heard either side from home, but growing up in a fairly religious town I was faced with this early on and never understood religious peoples perspective till my 20's.
Saying I feel the lord, was the same as a child's wish to Santa. that's how I always took it.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• …
• 13
• Next ›
• Page