Do You Believe in God?

[shrundowr]

Smart girls. Tho most of them fit my defintion of 'pretty' as well

 

[Vhaerun]

It seems that you might have misread what I said, though to make you feel better *whisper* you aren't the only one.

All I said was that our religious foundings and definition of God come from our beliefs in what is right and wrong, good and evil. Good and Evil is defined by the social norm which is determined by the people's overall thoughts and actions as a generality.

Example would be that we use our definition of good and righteous, multiply it, and then apply it to God. So our social belief in what is good and right becomes God.
therefore you killing and raping would be considered evil by the populace as a whole.

I'm sorry the smart part of your brain wasn't working when you read what I had typed.

What you really mean, then, is god and our religious foundations have everything to do with being good or evil. Before there was belief in the Christian God, people were still good or evil. There are always extremes on both sides of the fence, but I do agree with your statement, if you flip it around.

 

[shrundowr]

Actually enforcing of morality is a secondary function of Religion, and earlier religions don't have anything to do with it (either it effecting the views of the populace as a whole or the views of the populace affecting it) The main function, obviously is an attempt to explain ones surroundings. The whole enforcing of morality (and defining of it) didn't come around until rulers realized what a valuable tool religion could be as far as controlling the masses. (ya know the whole 'a king is just a man, but a god is a god' concept, and the king is somehow divenely chosen to speak for him (or in Japan's case supposedly was a deity himself) etc etc

 

[Vorspire]

the bible was written by a madman. what does that say.

 

[Rosetta]

Well we have created our own society with different things being important, we still enhance beaty because goodlooking people mate more often with their kind than ugly ones. Same with intelligent people, mating more often with each other than with dumber equivalents.

The big difference is that we also allow people with bad genes to live and reproduce. We call it humanity, caring for the ones that have been less lucky with getting the right genes or just have parents with bad genes. Actually this isn't a big problem since we have created all this technology and wealth to make our live easier and to help those less fortunate.

This means that we allow good genes to coexist with bad genes where normally nature would make those genes die out.

Which makes us come to the question if we havn't been too succesfull in evolution, since we are now able to beat the general nature as in we do not have any real enemies besides ourselves. We are able to destroy anything on this world including ourselves. which has now become one of our main issues ie nuclear threats and the environment that we slowly destroy.

We have become very smart creatures that created a huge wealth, however we are relatively self centered, which means we allow a lot of bad stuff to happen to our fellow people on this planet and future generations to make it better and easier for ourselves. This is something that hasn't been calculated in into the nature and evolution, and human kind will have to fix it themselves or extinct and make room for a new and maybe better species.

There are so many things wrong with all of that.
Where do you get that information?
Someone has been feeding you a large heaping of bullshit...

 

[Radwen]

Smart girls. Tho most of them fit my defintion of 'pretty' as well

You'd hit a cow, so that doesn't say much about your definition of pretty.

There are so many things wrong with all of that.
Where do you get that information?
Someone has been feeding you a large heaping of bullshit...

He's actually right.

Keeping the weak alive doesn't help human evolution. It just helps that weak branch in its evolution, but truly they are not needed in the bettering of our race. If a computer should be to decide the fate of the weak, they would be discarded and used for whatever ever resources they can provide and prohibited from reproduction.

Eventually we will develop techniques to assure that gene variety is offered during conception, so issues like incest will no longer be a problem.

In the best the weak had more meaning because they brought variety to our gene pools, but in the future they will most likely be useless.

Although, we value the weak for they bring contrast to our world. Therefore humans will not follow that path and the weak will continue to live on.
There are many values the the weak and ugly bring that we ignore and/or are not conscious of.

Even though I realize this, I'm still against social systems as they just allow the weak to stay weak and often make some potentially strong beings come weak. I believe the weak should be supported in their evolution by giving them means, not by giving them the final solution.

Yes the use of "final solution" was used as a play on words as well as its simple meaning.

 

[Arkad]

What attracts women and what attracts men are two completely different things... So really there is no ugly people mating with ugly people and beautiful people mating with beautful people.

How many times have you seen a hot girl with a less than attractive guy? I see it all the time.

 

[b0b01]

A question very close to the one of the topic starter is, do you want a god to exist?

I mean what does that say about us, with what intend would he/she/it have made us.

Are we just his toys? Have to live up to his rules, he can judge over us (heaven and hell etc).

 

[Arkad]

I mean what does that say about us, with what intend would he/she/it have made us.

Are we just his toys? Have to live up to his rules, he can judge over us (heaven and hell etc).

That would assume God has a mouth to speak with.

This would also assume God judges you. But since the culture sets the morals it would be difficult for there be a standard "right and wrong" that spans across the world for everyone. So what set of morals is God judging people by? I think the whole sin and judging thing is put in place by religions to keep people in line using fear. It's a strong motivator.

Personally, I think all the rules that God supposedly have put in place are just made up by a group of people. This is basically how a religion is created - by people.

If you look at all religions they all want a real human connection with God in some way shape or form, usually through prophets... Look at Mohammed, Jesus, Moses, the list goes on.. They are all supposed to have had real contact with God who gave him some kind of message.

The older I get the more I doubt that God has any connection with this world at all, or gave anyone any kind of special attention. IMO it's just a power play by religions so they can be the "it" religion.

Guess what happens when you have multiple religions which all have prophets which have laid claim to that definite connection with God? You guessed it, a shit load of violence.

When you have Christians coming to your door and they want to convert you to their religion they don't say "Do you accept God as your saviour?" they say "Do you accept Jesus as your savior?" Tricky, tricky...

Why do religions place so much emphasis on the prophets when the emphasis should be placed on God?

Oddly enough, all religions who fight each other strangely forget that they all have something in common: They all believe in God.

There will be peace on Earth someday.

But not yet.

 

[Radwen]

There will be peace on Earth someday.

What if the human race outlives the planet?

If you meant there will be peace someday within a world of human communities, thats just plain silly. Unless you're running for Miss America, or you're doing a project for your 3rd grade class, real people don't say stupid stuff like that.

 

[skull77]

Yeah but matter cant be made from nothing, so what form was the matter in before the big bang?

Disclaimer: my knowledge of the Big Bang Theory is very limited.

yep, the first rule of science is that nothing can be created from nothing.

i believe in god.

 

[Alex21]

shouldn't run over another man's cat.

in your case, your just sticking up for your wife

 

[shrundowr]

There will never be peace on earth, and even wanting it is bad.

 

[jhs59]

Yeah but matter cant be made from nothing, so what form was the matter in before the big bang?

Disclaimer: my knowledge of the Big Bang Theory is very limited.

yep, the first rule of science is that nothing can be created from nothing.

i believe in god.

Matter can be created from energy. Einstein's famous E=MC² equation works both ways.

 

[Admin God]

Suppose I don't have enough self confidence to say I believe in god.

 

[Rosetta]

You'd hit a cow, so that doesn't say much about your definition of pretty.


He's actually right.

Keeping the weak alive doesn't help human evolution. It just helps that weak branch in its evolution, but truly they are not needed in the bettering of our race. If a computer should be to decide the fate of the weak, they would be discarded and used for whatever ever resources they can provide and prohibited from reproduction.

Eventually we will develop techniques to assure that gene variety is offered during conception, so issues like incest will no longer be a problem.

In the best the weak had more meaning because they brought variety to our gene pools, but in the future they will most likely be useless.

Although, we value the weak for they bring contrast to our world. Therefore humans will not follow that path and the weak will continue to live on.
There are many values the the weak and ugly bring that we ignore and/or are not conscious of.

Even though I realize this, I'm still against social systems as they just allow the weak to stay weak and often make some potentially strong beings come weak. I believe the weak should be supported in their evolution by giving them means, not by giving them the final solution.

Yes the use of "final solution" was used as a play on words as well as its simple meaning.

Here is the major flaw I see with the argument - we have no idea what the good or bad genes are.

One alternative is Gattaca. - link.

It has nothing to do with how a person looks. Good looking people do not have sex more than the ugly ones. - if there is such a difference. Because if this were true there would be no ugly people or at least very very few. Considering they would not have ever been born because their parents would not of had sex.

We have evolved mostly in intelligence, most (not all) other things we are inferior or weaker. Naturally speaking we would use this intelligence to keep everyone alive. Since we work better as a group than on our own. This is part of our evolution, to take care of the weak and make them stronger using tools that we created. This in turn makes the strong more healthy.

If we follow a logic that natural evolution will take care of the bad genes and it took out everyone that has an illness and we did nothing to stop it we would of never found out how to help avoid it and to stay healthy. The stronger genes gained from a healthy lifestyle would of never passed because we would of never learned how to avoid the danger.

The key to a species continuing is variety, that includes the weak and the strong. It is absolutely essential to have that variety. There are genes that are not always known of that could help people carry on in the future. We don't know what is weaker or stronger. It's not a black/white situation.

There are a few people in the past that have tried genetic cleansing because of what they thought was a better or stronger trait in people. Not only were they inhuman they did nothing to strengthen the human race. More to abolish it.

 

[Arkad]

What if the human race outlives the planet?

If you meant there will be peace someday within a world of human communities, thats just plain silly. Unless you're running for Miss America, or you're doing a project for your 3rd grade class, real people don't say stupid stuff like that.

Humans continue to advance not only with technology but our brains as well.

Spiritual evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I believe there's a spiritual/intellectual level of advancement a civiization can attain where they do not fight each other.

 

[b0b01]

Here is the major flaw I see with the argument - we have no idea what the good or bad genes are.

One alternative is Gattaca. - link.

Nope, but we can learn which genes are good for what. btw are you talking about genetic manipulation now? because that is not what evolution is about at all, and personally i think genetic manipulation is a very bad thing.

It has nothing to do with how a person looks. Good looking people do not have sex more than the ugly ones. - if there is such a difference. Because if this were true there would be no ugly people or at least very very few. Considering they would not have ever been born because their parents would not of had sex.

I think you misread something, noone ever stated that ugly people have less sex.

We have evolved mostly in intelligence, most (not all) other things we are inferior or weaker. Naturally speaking we would use this intelligence to keep everyone alive. Since we work better as a group than on our own. This is part of our evolution, to take care of the weak and make them stronger using tools that we created. This in turn makes the strong more healthy.

Taking care of weaker is not part of our evolution, however it is something that has been made possible by our evolution giving us this high amount of intelligence.

If we follow a logic that natural evolution will take care of the bad genes and it took out everyone that has an illness and we did nothing to stop it we would of never found out how to help avoid it and to stay healthy. The stronger genes gained from a healthy lifestyle would of never passed because we would of never learned how to avoid the danger.

Not true, there are not many races that kill their own kind. The selection happens by outside factors, one of the things of evolution is that you can become immune to an illness.

The key to a species continuing is variety, that includes the weak and the strong. It is absolutely essential to have that variety. There are genes that are not always known of that could help people carry on in the future. We don't know what is weaker or stronger. It's not a black/white situation.

Variety is important as in that people have different genes, however there are a number of traits we know of are not ever going to be of use for human kind. For example the ones that cause genetic diseases (Down syndrome etc.). The same can be said that genes that cause you to be less smart will never be as usefull to human kind as the ones that will enhance intelligence.

There are a few people in the past that have tried genetic cleansing because of what they thought was a better or stronger trait in people. Not only were they inhuman they did nothing to strengthen the human race. More to abolish it.

Hmm again, nothing to do with evolution, this is just mad people doing crazy stuff.


Anyway i think you should read some wikipedia or something, half the stuff you talk about is not what evolution stands for.

 

[Rosetta]

Knowing full well that this could happen, and having been down this road before I will just agree to disagree on this. Because there is just too way much miscommunication and very little information on all sides.

Except for one point: "I think you misread something, noone ever stated that ugly people have less sex."
You're right I misread that.

Anyway i think you should read some wikipedia or something, half the stuff you talk about is not what evolution stands for.

I have read Darwin's Origin of Species along with books about primate evolution specifically.

But again there is nothing but miscommunication here.

 

[Arkad]

I heard ugly people have more sex