Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
People need to get something out of everything - otherwise, they don't do it.
-
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!
Who Created God?
- Thread starter Dan4reason
- Start date
People need to get something out of everything - otherwise, they don't do it.
And why is that?
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
I suggest you take some courses, or do some reading, on human psychology and human behavior, if you want to understand the answers to that.
That would only explain the method, not the reason.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
If you're lookng for ultimate roots of human behavior, then the answer is in evolutionary biology, and why various traits and behaviors had survival advantages, and thus, were passed along in our genes.
Again, method, not reason.
Why did evolution go in that direction?
(psst. whisper, whisper. play you're cards right, you'll get me going in a circle. wink)
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
There is no direction. You misunderstand evolution.
I understand evolution. It's a reactionary force that utilizes natural selection which allows a species to adapt to new situations. Those who can adapt and breed evolve and survive; those who are unable to adapt and breed, die out.
Maybe I should have phrased my question better: why did humans evolve the way we did?
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Same reason everything evolved the ways it did: our genes were passed on due to survival advantage and/or sexual selection. You should understand this if you understand evolution.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Evolution doesn't utilize natural selection. Evolution is a result of natural selection.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Turn out like what? You're not actually asking a question.
I'm not going to keep giving you answers to an endless stream of meaningless questions. If you have something to ask, ask it. If you don't actually want the answer, then don't bother asking it.
Ah, thanks. My mistake. (I'm not a biologist, so while I understand intellectually, I have trouble wording it.)
Why did life utilize genetic heritage (or whatever the technical term is) in order to survive?
The point is, when reason is in question, you can go on for eternity asking for the ultimate reason, and never reach it.
Besides, asking why isn't meaningless. If it were, nobody would ask it.
The final point is that this:
turns out to be correct. (And it also seems that I should probably pay a little closer attention to what the heck I'm actually trying to debate. I think I just proved my opponents' points.
lol)
Therefore, I'll just cut to my argument.
From a secular standpoint, it is obvious (IMO) that humanity created gods, but I do not believe it was simple imagination; I believe it was the very psyche of humanity, mine included. Otherwise, there wouldn't be so much consistency between the myths and the characters of the gods.
Therefore, when it comes to objective reality, there are no literal beings that live in the sky or on some remote part of the earth. (When it comes to different dimensions, well... I don't know what the current scientific stance on those is, so I'll not talk about it.) However, when it comes to subjective reality, it's not so simple. Because different people have different ways of viewing the world, different reasons are necessary.
That's the difference between method and reason: the former is objective ("how") and the other is subjective ("why"). Therefore, the method is the human psyche, and the reason is different for each person. I think I just learned now that the method is a perfectly legitimate reason, and I'm sorry for wasting your time like that, ats, and for dragging the thread like that. :sorry1:
turns out to be correct. (And it also seems that I should probably pay a little closer attention to what the heck I'm actually trying to debate. I think I just proved my opponents' points.
lol)Therefore, I'll just cut to my argument.
From a secular standpoint, it is obvious (IMO) that humanity created gods, but I do not believe it was simple imagination; I believe it was the very psyche of humanity, mine included. Otherwise, there wouldn't be so much consistency between the myths and the characters of the gods.
Therefore, when it comes to objective reality, there are no literal beings that live in the sky or on some remote part of the earth. (When it comes to different dimensions, well... I don't know what the current scientific stance on those is, so I'll not talk about it.) However, when it comes to subjective reality, it's not so simple. Because different people have different ways of viewing the world, different reasons are necessary.
That's the difference between method and reason: the former is objective ("how") and the other is subjective ("why"). Therefore, the method is the human psyche, and the reason is different for each person. I think I just learned now that the method is a perfectly legitimate reason, and I'm sorry for wasting your time like that, ats, and for dragging the thread like that. :sorry1:
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
I'm sorry, I have no idea what this question is asking.
Then don't ask specific questions. When you ask a specific question, which has a specific answer - expect to get it. I don't know what you mean by the ultimate reason - unless you're assuming that there's a reason why anything exists. The answer to that is that we don't know, and we don't even know if there's a reason.
Asking why isn't meaningless - but asking questions without caring about what the answers are, is.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Nevermind - just saw your response.
The reason/explanation as to why anything exists is because it is the nature of reality for those things to exist.
Dude, that's just a glorified way of saying, "It's the way it is because it just is." That's not helpful to anyone.
Including the nature of reality gives this concept far more depth, and is the right explanation for why reality exists.
Is this answer not sufficient for you? If not, what kind of answer are you looking for?