"3. Survival is therefore objectively good." I don't know how to put it any simpler. An objective process hard wired my brain with a survival instinct. On pure survival instinct I jump out of the way of an oncoming car. It was good that I survived because I am hard wired by an objective process to try to remain alive and I accomplished what I am programmed to accomplish.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Evolution is illogical and non sense
- Thread starter ttechsan
- Start date
outhouse
Atheistically
This just shows your ignorance to the definition of a scientific theory and what it is in context.
Gravity is fact.
We know little about it, and cannot recreate it.
Of course it does. If an objective process has produced a survival instinct then it's obviously good if you survive because you accomplished what the objective progress has programmed you to try to accomplish. Stay alive.
Theweirdtophat
Well-Known Member
Evolution will be like many other theories and get tossed aside in exchange for a newer theory that actually makes sense. Both creationists and evolutionists are often stubborn and will stick to their ways even if it is wrong. What fantasy? That scientists and philosophers of the past were once called crazy? Look at George Washington Carver, Nikola Tesla, ect. and see what people said about them. Yet they were proven right. I don't just blindly accept the media or gossip saying that one person is crazy because sometimes the "crazy person is right." What would you even know about pseudo science? Or are you just throwing that term around to sound like an intellectual? You like the others have yet to say why he's wrong. Just that he is.
Also outhouse, I know gravity is real but the theory of gravity talks about how it works, not whether or not if it exists. We know it exists. People get that mixed up so many times.
Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
Very true
Hoyle used the word 'pseudoscience' to describe Lemaitre's primeval atom theory, which he mocked as 'big bang'
Newton's laws were considered 'immutable' longer than the theory of evolution has been around, and with far more direct supporting evidence.
McBell
Admiral Obvious
So it is 'objectively' good that everything that survived survived?
Even serial killers?
Serial rapists?
Sociopaths?
I fail to see the "objectivity".
Especially when we go from humans to say bacteria....
McBell
Admiral Obvious
unless it is actually bad we survived...
bad bacteria, for example.
So survival is not objectively good.
outhouse
Atheistically
Home | NOVA Labs | PBS
I recommend that theist or atheist should not post from ignorance.
And mythology is not credible means of explaining anything in nature.
Education and knowledge is power, in these debates.
I recommend that theist or atheist should not post from ignorance.
And mythology is not credible means of explaining anything in nature.
Education and knowledge is power, in these debates.
Do you have a better one that makes more sense? Do you know of anybody who has a better one? I for one would be very interested! Anything that is logical, rational and makes sense. No supernatural theories please.
FearGod
Freedom Of Mind
Nature won't create nature, saying supernatural doesn't mean magic but it means something of different nature which we don't know what it is and how it looks like.
outhouse
Atheistically
Its embarrassing that with no evidence at all for a replacement hypothesis, you refuse the factual evidence already in place.
Evolution is fact, and it is never going anywhere. You will die one day, but this factual theory will only be accepted by more people as we educate the children who can accept facts and knowledge and credible education.
In other words, we don't need to change your mind, we don't care about tour fanaticism. WE will teach your children the knowledge and education you refuse.
Mohammad Nur Syamsu
Well-Known Member
The prejudice against the supernatural excludes all theories in which freedom is real and relevant.
The explanation for the works of Mozart is the unseen and unevidenced spirit of Mozart, who decided where to put the dots on the music sheet.
The fact part of the explanation is how it is decided, the opinion part is the spirit of Mozart.
So too with the explanation for the universe there are the facts about how it is decided and opinion in respect to the spirit which decided it.
War, environmental calamity, economic calamity, are you on the side who accepts freedom is real and relevant, or with the evil evolutionists who reject subjectivity and freedom?
Survival is objectively good. As long as a person is alive and doesn't pose a threat to the well being and survival of others he's a potential asset to society. Even serial killers and serial rapists and sociopaths. We have no use for them six feet under. But if we can manage to capture them alive we could learn a whole lot about what makes them tick and maybe even learn the danger signs and catch potential serial killers and rapists before they manage to commit any crime or at least learn how to catch them quicker.
Even bad bacteria "want to" survive and multiply so if they do that's objectively good for them.Muslims fly planes into buildings, massacre French cartoonists, decapitate Christians, rape children to death Muslim Man Rapes Child Bride Until She Dies - Religious Freedom Coalition
and we evolutionists are evil because we don't feel free to do such things?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Complete unadulterated nonsense. Again, not only has evolution been observed (Google "speciation". for example), the evidence for it is overwhelming, not only in terms of the fossil record, but also with the genome testing and observations done on speciation.
LOL! The term "pseudo-science" has been around for at least five decades now that I'm aware of, and it probably predates that. I use to use and give examples of that term in my introductory anthropology course back in the early 1970"s.
BTW, the source you cite is hardly new, and some others here of my vintage may remember "Chariots of the Gods" and the garbage that it put forth.
This is not to say that there couldn't be some sort of extra-terrestrial impact (in some ways, there most assuredly was), but that these pseudo-scientists do not use the scientific method, nor do they subject their "findings" to peer-review, which must be done with any serious scientific paper for purposes of cross-examination. All these people do is to prey on the gullible so as to sell books and make money. Snake-oil salesmen abound, and you have fallen victim to at least one of them.
Anyhow, I'm moving on to "greener pastures", so I'll give you the last word.
So what does one do when one animal has to survive by taking the lives of other animals? Is it objectively good if the predator kills hundreds of prey animals throughout its life so that it can survive, or is it objectively good if the predator starves and its hundreds of potential victims survive instead? Also, is it objectively good to keep an animal alive for years when it is in misery when one could end its suffering and terminate it early?
FearGod
Freedom Of Mind
It is stupid to generalize Muslims are awful because of such news,
Some American soldiers raped Iraqi girls, does that mean Americans are filthy people.