Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   the principles of world view
homunculus
Member (Idle past 5435 days)
Posts: 86
Joined: 01-21-2009


Message 1 of 85 (495342)
01-22-2009 2:18 AM


I have something to consider. Lets pretend for a moment that creation and evolution are subjective to the individual. Now, take a look at the principles or the world views of each. In the realm of creation, everything being created, designed and sanctified by the most high, we learn from the bible that everything is "beautifully and wonderfully made" and that the lord highly values and ponders on his creation and humans. So people have high value, priceless worth and dubbed in the absolute love and wonder of god.
In the realm of evolution, everything is prostrated to, nothing! Nothing created everything (big bang). Nothing created life (abiogenesis). Nothing designates purpose, reason, design and meaning. and human beings have absolutely no value at all. We are just a branch off the monkey block. Human life demands no respect and no consideration. I suppose you could say that the earth is God (enviro-mentally applied). Or say that man is God. Because there is nothing to decide what has worth and what doesn't.
I suppose you could say the golden rule is "he who has the gold makes the rules", I bet we don't see any of that today. But Jesus said that golden rule is, "love the lord your god above all else, and love your neighbor as yourself". In evolution, your neighbor could be, your family or your dog, or fish, or birds, animals, trees, doesn't matter.
Finally, I have always said that nature of humans is a self destructive one (see 'the fall of man' in genesis). the way of man (evolution) is total selfishness. What feels good, do it. No need to regard anyone else, they just complicate life and get in the way of our desires. I suppose you could say we are our own gods. We don't answer to anyone. But the way of God (creation) is total care and consideration. Jesus showed us that love in its truest form is sacrifice. Love is sacrifice. I like that. We are our brothers keeper. We take care of what we are given and we answer to god and are not exempt to his laws.
In conclusion, I would say that it all comes down to how we decide what principle to eat from. what tree to eat from, the tree of evolution, and become our own god. But the tree of creation, and humble yourself to God. These world views govern morality and cultural application in social economics.
Edited by the overmind, : No reason given.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : A few more tweaks.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Adminnemooseus, posted 01-22-2009 2:32 AM homunculus has replied
 Message 4 by Adminnemooseus, posted 01-23-2009 4:40 AM homunculus has not replied
 Message 6 by Huntard, posted 01-23-2009 5:31 AM homunculus has not replied
 Message 8 by Dr Jack, posted 01-23-2009 6:29 AM homunculus has not replied
 Message 9 by PaulK, posted 01-23-2009 7:21 AM homunculus has not replied
 Message 10 by RAZD, posted 01-23-2009 7:58 AM homunculus has not replied
 Message 11 by Modulous, posted 01-23-2009 8:06 AM homunculus has not replied
 Message 19 by Otto Tellick, posted 01-26-2009 11:39 PM homunculus has not replied
 Message 81 by RAZD, posted 02-01-2009 9:46 PM homunculus has not replied

Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 2 of 85 (495346)
01-22-2009 2:32 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 2:18 AM


Fixes needed
See here. The same applies to this proposed topic's message 1.
Adminnemooseus

New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.
Report a problem etc. type topics:
Report Technical Problems Here: No. 1
Report Discussion Problems Here: No. 2
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
Other useful links:
Forum Guidelines, [thread=-19,-112], [thread=-17,-45], [thread=-19,-337], [thread=-14,-1073]
Admin writes:
It really helps moderators figure out if a topic is disintegrating because of general misbehavior versus someone in particular if the originally non-misbehaving members kept it that way. When everyone is prickly and argumentative and off-topic and personal then it's just too difficult to tell. We have neither infinite time to untie the Gordian knot, nor the wisdom of Solomon.
There used to be a comedian who presented his ideas for a better world, and one of them was to arm everyone on the highway with little rubber dart guns. Every time you see a driver doing something stupid, you fire a little dart at his car. When a state trooper sees someone driving down the highway with a bunch of darts all over his car he pulls him over for being an idiot.
Please make it easy to tell you apart from the idiots. Source

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 2:18 AM homunculus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 2:32 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied

homunculus
Member (Idle past 5435 days)
Posts: 86
Joined: 01-21-2009


Message 3 of 85 (495421)
01-22-2009 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Adminnemooseus
01-22-2009 2:32 AM


Re: Fixes needed
"capitol letters done"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Adminnemooseus, posted 01-22-2009 2:32 AM Adminnemooseus has not replied

Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 4 of 85 (495504)
01-23-2009 4:40 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 2:18 AM


Lacks focus, but I'll promote it
I predict this is going to be one big mess of a topic.
Adminnemooseus

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 2:18 AM homunculus has not replied

Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 5 of 85 (495505)
01-23-2009 4:42 AM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

Huntard
Member (Idle past 2294 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 6 of 85 (495517)
01-23-2009 5:31 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 2:18 AM


Hi homunculus, welcome to EvC.
It seems you've got a very wrong idea about what evolution is. It's not a philosophy, it is a fact and a theory of science. NOTHNG in evolution tells you how to live your life, that's a matter that's wholly seperate from it.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 2:18 AM homunculus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Annafan, posted 01-23-2009 5:39 AM Huntard has not replied

Annafan
Member (Idle past 4578 days)
Posts: 418
From: Belgium
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 7 of 85 (495519)
01-23-2009 5:39 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Huntard
01-23-2009 5:31 AM


Huntard writes:
NOTHNG in evolution tells you how to live your life, that's a matter that's wholly seperate from it.
Or in other words:
"Evolution is descriptive, not prescriptive..."
Treating it otherwise would be an example of the naturalistic fallacy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Huntard, posted 01-23-2009 5:31 AM Huntard has not replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 8 of 85 (495524)
01-23-2009 6:29 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 2:18 AM


Now, take a look at the principles or the world views of each. In the realm of creation, everything being created, designed and sanctified by the most high, we learn from the bible that everything is "beautifully and wonderfully made" and that the lord highly values and ponders on his creation and humans.
Finally, I have always said that nature of humans is a self destructive one
So which is it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 2:18 AM homunculus has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 9 of 85 (495525)
01-23-2009 7:21 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 2:18 AM


The fundamental error in your argument is the assumption that evolution and creation are simply chosen without regaerd to the truth of the propositions.
In reality evolution is a scientific conclusion which is massivlet supported by the evidence. Creation is a religious dogma.
If God exists, and has been active in the history of life then the evidence we find should reflect His activity - since it incldues the results of that activity. And that evidence points to evolution, not creation. Creation, then, is a human-created doctrine which seeks to dictate to God what he did do.
Thus your final paragraph should be reworded:
In conclusion, I would say that it all comes down to how we decide what principle to eat from. what tree to eat from, the tree of evolution, and humble yourself to God. But[sic] the tree of creation, and become our own god.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 2:18 AM homunculus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by John 10:10, posted 01-28-2009 12:40 PM PaulK has replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 10 of 85 (495533)
01-23-2009 7:58 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 2:18 AM


Start with a false precept and go downhill
Hi homunculus aka overmind
Lets pretend for a moment that creation and evolution are subjective to the individual.
Why pretend something that is patently false? Evolution is not subjective, it is based on objective evidence and replicated observations. The objective evidence includes observed instances of evolution and speciation, and these are facts.
Why pretend something that is true? "Creation" is subjective, as evidenced by the thousands of different religious models for creation, and the hundreds of different sects within religions.
It is rather self-evident that these beliefs are purely subjective, based on the variety of beliefs.
Now, take a look at the principles or the world views of each.
Neither is a world view. One is science (explains how things work not why) the other is myth (which myth depends on the subjective religion involved).
In the realm of creation, everything being created, designed and sanctified by the most high, we learn from the bible that everything is "beautifully and wonderfully made" and that the lord highly values and ponders on his creation and humans.
Oh, you assume that creation means only christian biblical myth, as your subjective interpretation. What about all the other beliefs, including those that believe that life was created to evolve?
You are mistaking your subjective opposition to evolution based on your subjective belief to apply to all subjective beliefs. That is not how "subjective" works.
The fact is that there are many evolutionary biologists that believe in god. Steven Jay Gould is one, Ken Miller is another, to name a couple that should be well known to creationists.
In the realm of evolution, everything is prostrated to, nothing! Nothing created everything (big bang). Nothing created life (abiogenesis). Nothing designates purpose, reason, design and meaning. and human beings have absolutely no value at all. We are just a branch off the monkey block. Human life demands no respect and no consideration. I suppose you could say that the earth is God (enviro-mentally applied). Or say that man is God. Because there is nothing to decide what has worth and what doesn't.
Evolution is science, not philosophy. It explains how life works, not why.
You seem to think that evolution is diametrically opposed to subjective belief, however it is a fact that there are many subjective beliefs that are not diametrically opposed to evolution, so evolution is not necessarily opposed to subjective belief. That is part of the definition of "subjective."
Science in general, and evolution included, uses objective reality to disprove subjective concepts with objective facts. If science "opposes" the subjective belief in a young earth, for example, it is not the science that opposes the belief, it is reality. It is an objective fact that the earth is old, and this is not subjective.
These world views govern morality and cultural application in social economics.
Neither science (how things actually work) nor creation (myth of origin) govern morality - morality is based on cultural values and is subjective from person to person, from culture to culture.
That some creation myth or other can control morality of the believers is falsified when we look at the jail population: there is no difference in the percentage of religions in jail and out, leading to the conclusion that religions have absolutely no effect whatever on moral behavior.
Perhaps ridding culture of false beliefs would go a long way towards a more rational "social economics."
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : more

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 2:18 AM homunculus has not replied

Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 11 of 85 (495534)
01-23-2009 8:06 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 2:18 AM


Imperfect and ridiculous
I have something to consider. Lets pretend for a moment that creation and evolution are subjective to the individual. Now, take a look at the principles or the world views of each. In the realm of creation, everything being created, designed and sanctified by the most high, we learn from the bible that everything is "beautifully and wonderfully made" and that the lord highly values and ponders on his creation and humans. So people have high value, priceless worth and dubbed in the absolute love and wonder of god.
Depends on our view. If we believe that an entity should be measured by its words (where applicable), then yes, the Lord God highly values humans. If we believe that an entity should be measured by its deeds, the Lord God clearly has a less than stellar opinion of humanity.
In the realm of evolution, everything is prostrated to, nothing! Nothing created everything (big bang). Nothing created life (abiogenesis). Nothing designates purpose, reason, design and meaning. and human beings have absolutely no value at all. We are just a branch off the monkey block. Human life demands no respect and no consideration. I suppose you could say that the earth is God (enviro-mentally applied). Or say that man is God. Because there is nothing to decide what has worth and what doesn't.
Well, let's not get confused over evolution/big bang and all that. Let us simply say that according to the physicalism metaphysics and the conclusions of science based on methological naturalism...
A point of interest, naturalism or physicalism does not claim things came 'from nothing' - indeed that would seem to be a ludicrous position. However, it may seem that way in comparison to the specific theological position you mentioned as contrast. In fact, some things are supposed to be self-existing other things are the result of the established laws of nature (Thermodynamics and other chemistry and physics). Pretty much the same view as the God view in this regard.
But let's talk about value. How much is a car worth? What is the value of a car? It is whatever the market will pay for it. What is the value of a human? It is whatever the market will pay for it. Just because one buyer no longer exists (God) doesn't mean there aren't other buyers. The only value a human has is dependent on the question 'To whom?'. Obviously to inanimate objects the question is meaningless but to other humans? To organisms that depend on them? It might be 'nothing' through 'lunch' all the way to 'everything'.
Finally, I have always said that nature of humans is a self destructive one (see 'the fall of man' in genesis). the way of man (evolution) is total selfishness. What feels good, do it. No need to regard anyone else, they just complicate life and get in the way of our desires. I suppose you could say we are our own gods. We don't answer to anyone
Humans are self destructive and yet humans and their domesticated animals currently makes up the majority of biomass on the planet. That doesn't seem to pan out.
Do you honestly think there is no need to regard anyone else in a world without God? If I killed my neighbour's husband so I can have my wicked way with her, would I be punished? Very likely - there are very real authorities who enforce social desires (I don't want to be murdered or my SO raped so I am happy to work to pay for the enforcement of a social contract of mutual protection). Other animals have crime and punishment for breaking certain rules (exile, or exclusion from the mutual protection of others is a common punishment as is violence) is it because they are God fearing? Why should it be?
Evolution has ensured that I am basically pretty good at making sure my genes get passed on. Raping people is a fairly good strategy for this, but I also have genes for (warning: grotesque oversimplification) social awareness and the ability to comprehend consequences. If I rape I am likely to be placed in a building surrounded by only other violent men with sexual crimes under their belt. Not much chance of passing on my genes there, I dare say I wouldn't enjoy it much. So I don't rape.
Remove those consequence, and we see rape and murder increase dramatically. God still exists or doesn't. The belief in God doesn't change. But find a place which has undergone a collapse of law (where consequences for rape are not meted out for example) and you will find rape/murder/theft all over the place, from atheists, Christians, Muslims and just about anyone else. Just look at war zones and so called 'failed states', or during certain natural disasters where the police are too busy helping people who are in immediate danger, rather than prosecuting those that may or may not, after significant investigation be able to be charged for a crime.
I seem to remember an anonymous survey that suggested that most men would commit a rape if they knew they could get away with it (ie not face a social penalty). We know that men will kill if they can get away with it (see: war). Does this conflict with the materialist/physicalist metaphysics?
In conclusion, I would say that it all comes down to how we decide what principle to eat from. what tree to eat from, the tree of evolution, and become our own god. But the tree of creation, and humble yourself to God. These world views govern morality and cultural application in social economics.
Well sure - what we believe is, as far as anything can be - our choice. We make the decision based on our own criteria. In order to make a decent decision, its always a good idea to try and figure out exactly what each position is.
On the one hand, we are answerable to each other. We screw someone over, we might get away with it. Society might decide to punish us. We must weigh up the pros and cons of being naughty and make a decision based on that. We might be forced by other humans to live in a small building for a long time, or they might even execute us or demand we do a certain amount of compensatory work (ie., get fined). Does the risk of this punishment deter us or not? Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. In order to protect ourselves from getting screwed over we should invest what we can in improving methods of catching and proving the misdeeds of others.
In the Christian God's eye view - God will sort out punishment so it doesn't really matter whether we catch a criminal. It doesn't really matter if they go to prison. What's 25 years in prison compared with eternity of hell fire. And if God doesn't think they should be punished, what right do we have to punish them? And we had better not be naughty because nobody escapes this justice. So we don't have to be moral, we just have to be obedient in deed and thought. Though we might be able to ask for forgiveness if we mess up, as long as we mean it, in which case there is no punishment, indeed there is glorious reward.
We get to choose which one we want to live by here on earth. Generally speaking, we seem to live by the former while pretending to live by the latter. That's humans for you - imperfect and ridiculous.
Incidentally we can frame this anyway we want:
Christianity: Love love, beauty, freedom.
Materialism: Cruel, harsh, cold, constraining.
or
Christianity: Cruel, capricious, amoral, no true freedom at all, delusional
Materialism: Sometimes beautiful, sometimes cruel, just...you know...life, reality.
But it doesn't change the way things are. You are entitled, by our current social contract (assuming you live in a 'free' society) to choose to believe what you want for whatever reasons you choose. If you choose to believe in Christianity because you believe it makes you feel better to believe you live in a world filled with the love of a supreme father figure who will punish all those horrible people and reward all the good ones without fail...fill your boots as we say here in Britain.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 2:18 AM homunculus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Annafan, posted 01-23-2009 8:23 AM Modulous has not replied

Annafan
Member (Idle past 4578 days)
Posts: 418
From: Belgium
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 12 of 85 (495538)
01-23-2009 8:23 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by Modulous
01-23-2009 8:06 AM


Re: Imperfect and ridiculous
Modulous writes:
Do you honestly think there is no need to regard anyone else in a world without God? If I killed my neighbour's husband so I can have my wicked way with her, would I be punished? Very likely - there are very real authorities who enforce social desires (I don't want to be murdered or my SO raped so I am happy to work to pay for the enforcement of a social contract of mutual protection). Other animals have crime and punishment for breaking certain rules (exile, or exclusion from the mutual protection of others is a common punishment as is violence) is it because they are God fearing? Why should it be?
There's a podcast out there, a recording of a live radio show that had invited Richard Dawkins, in which a (Christian) caller plain simply states - on the air - that God watching him and possibly punishing him was the main reason for him NOT murdering/raping his neighbor.
I swear it, the guy was dead serious! Dawkins and the host were totally baffled (and so was anyone listening, I bet, lol).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Modulous, posted 01-23-2009 8:06 AM Modulous has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Larni, posted 01-23-2009 1:30 PM Annafan has replied
 Message 15 by RAZD, posted 01-23-2009 9:01 PM Annafan has not replied

Larni
Member (Idle past 163 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 13 of 85 (495584)
01-23-2009 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Annafan
01-23-2009 8:23 AM


Re: Imperfect and ridiculous
in which a (Christian) caller plain simply states - on the air - that God watching him and possibly punishing him was the main reason for him NOT murdering/raping his neighbor.
You know, maybe Christianity is a good thing: if it attracts that kind of bastard and then keeps him in check.
Leave it to the good natured non religious to govern themselves
Let the rest be told what to do by Sky Dad.
Edited by Larni, : Original art work.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Annafan, posted 01-23-2009 8:23 AM Annafan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Annafan, posted 01-23-2009 4:55 PM Larni has not replied
 Message 16 by Bailey, posted 01-24-2009 9:13 AM Larni has replied

Annafan
Member (Idle past 4578 days)
Posts: 418
From: Belgium
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 14 of 85 (495617)
01-23-2009 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Larni
01-23-2009 1:30 PM


Re: Imperfect and ridiculous
Larni writes:
You know, maybe Christianity is a good thing: if it attracts that kind of bastard and then keeps him in check.
Well, I was thinking more or less the same. Dawkins usually refuses to consider the idea that not everyone can be civilized without Hell in the back of their mind as repercussion. He so much wants to get completely rid of religion that he manages to convince himself that we can indeed do without it as a society. This incident would have been an excellent opportunity for the host to ask him about this. I don't remember whether he ceased the opportunity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Larni, posted 01-23-2009 1:30 PM Larni has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 15 of 85 (495667)
01-23-2009 9:01 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Annafan
01-23-2009 8:23 AM


Re: Imperfect and ridiculous
Hey Annafan,
... that God watching him and possibly punishing him was the main reason for him NOT murdering/raping his neighbor.
Yes we all know about how such faith controls the homophobic\gay wanna be mass murderer inside ... how taking a wide stance on religion helps control those beastly urges ...
The sad thing is that he had not learned any other reason to behave as a civil human being.
Dawkins and the host were totally baffled
That's the usual response to a non-sequitur.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Annafan, posted 01-23-2009 8:23 AM Annafan has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024