Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Not Sure I Understood All Your Questions - Hope This Is Enough

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Scott Abernathy on May 30, 2002 19:56:09 UTC

"This line of thinking would contain a permanent fallacy unless you believe in Intelligent design."

Okay, I am still with you becasue in essence I do believe in intelligent design, I just don't think it is able to be supported by science.

"Mechanical function evolves, according to natural selection, not for purpose...instead by what becomes a hindsight of causality."

Yes - Natural selection does not necessarily work for the benefit of the organism, because it works in the moment and has no ability of foresight.

"'Naturally', our traits do not serve our needs...they simply exist and are bombarded by those stresses you mention. How then? I believe intelligence begets intelligence, so that when a little intelligence is appreciated in another life form, in our far past by some bird or furry creature perhaps, this may improve their _interest in survival."

Agreed so far. Some traits that have been "acquired" in an earlier form still are being bombarded and are able to cope with our modern needs. Others are baggage that must be carried and dealt with in an ever changing world, hopefully not to the point of self-induced extinction/annihiliation.

"It's reaching, but would have statistical import.
This scheme could proceed intelligent design at the beginning, since a billion years in our time may be psychologically comparable to the geologically immense duration experienced by the molecules involved in formation of a crystal (if you've ever been a molecule, you'd know how boring it can be). Or the Intelligent Design might have begun more recently in a convoluted metaphysical progression."

I believe we are an accumulation of traits that have been randomly selected for in a random and chaotic environment. Those traits have "served" us well, because they got us to this point. All organisms are adapting to various stresses at the same time. Why did the concept of love develop? Because it is a moral teaching of Christ. I believe love is something that trancends species. I do not believe the human brain to be wholly different than that of other animals. I think our abilities (as seen from our vantage point) suit our needs in our particular climate (or at least the one that we evolved in). I believe that we are still a beast wearing slacks and button up shirts. Our culture has taken off and almost become independent of our evolved self. We are all trying to fit into the group and in the meantime we have lost our ability to focus on many other aspects of our animal self. I think as a group we are lost and isolated from the natural world. Our bubble gum culture only perpetuates our instability and our attached views of nature. We will pay the price for our collective arrogance when nature pays us back and wakes us up from our "independent" lifestyle from her (mother nature). We will soon wake up to the fact that we are just as natural and controlled by our environment as the rest of organic flora/fauna of the earth. I am rambling...


Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2023 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins