|
|
|
ASR
Skeptic Friend
69 Posts |
 Posted - 10/12/2005 : 14:33:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by pleco
Okay, we are dumb. Now move along.
BTW, the earth is a sphere. Round is a two-dimensional attribute.
"Is the earth round? No. Why not? Because it is a sphere, round is two dimensional." Emotion: Moron.
The fact that you have to belittle me on trivial subjects proves that I am in fact wasting my time here. You all cannot comprehend the difference between a scientific thought and a philosophical thought because it goes against the logic that you have been taught. This is a new way of thinking, don't be sheep, think about it before dismissing it, (right galileo?) |
From the moon they looked down to see if we measured up |
 |
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 14:34:49 [Permalink]
|
I still don't get what the act of philosophising has to do with evolution being wrong.
To me, philosophising, even having this conversation, is just a byproduct of your brain's complexity. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 14:36:05 [Permalink]
|
Blaaah blaaaah. We are sheep. We don't know how to think. You have shown us the light. Now we can follow your teachings. Blaaah blaaaah.
Your use of insults has now exposed you for what you really are.
Like I said, move along. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
| Edited by - pleco on 10/12/2005 14:36:33 |
|
|
|
ASR
Skeptic Friend
69 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 14:45:28 [Permalink]
|
| Whatever, I bit my tongue when philosophize was spelled philosophy. Rather than ask intelligent questions you make me out to be an idiot, you obviously don't understand some of what I am saying, which is partially my fault from a poorly written essay, however you could ask for clarification, but your ego will not allow it. |
From the moon they looked down to see if we measured up |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 14:57:30 [Permalink]
|
| Right, whatever helps you sleep at night. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 15:00:56 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ASR
Whatever, I bit my tongue when philosophize was spelled philosophy. Rather than ask intelligent questions you make me out to be an idiot, you obviously don't understand some of what I am saying, which is partially my fault from a poorly written essay, however you could ask for clarification, but your ego will not allow it.
Who are you responding to?
From your essay:
quote:
Ants are more successful than humans. Without emotion they formed societies and populated the earth. Why did humans develop philosophy if it is not required for survival? The ideal soldier does not involve emotions in decisions because emotions hinder survival, why did evolution create something that does not aide survival?
Ants work together because of instinct. We work together because of emotion. Children are afraid of being alone in the dark. This is left over from our early evolution where we had a reason to be afraid. Fear is an emotion, and it is an important emotion that kept early humans together. Love is another one which served the same purpose.
Emotions were very much beneficial to humans. "I am near a tiger. This causes me to feel fear, and fear feels bad." Conclusion? Get the hell away from that tiger.
Emotions can very much be seen as a result of evolution.
Edit:
ASR, keep in mind, they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. |
Why continue? Because we must. Because we have the call. Because it is nobler to fight for rationality without winning than to give up in the face of continued defeats. Because whatever true progress humanity makes is through the rationality of the occasional individual and because any one individual we may win for the cause may do more for humanity than a hundred thousand who hug their superstitions to their breast.
- Isaac Asimov |
| Edited by - Ricky on 10/12/2005 15:03:26 |
|
|
|
ASR
Skeptic Friend
69 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 15:06:42 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ricky
quote:
Originally posted by ASR
Whatever, I bit my tongue when philosophize was spelled philosophy. Rather than ask intelligent questions you make me out to be an idiot, you obviously don't understand some of what I am saying, which is partially my fault from a poorly written essay, however you could ask for clarification, but your ego will not allow it.
Who are you responding to?
From your essay:
quote:
Ants are more successful than humans. Without emotion they formed societies and populated the earth. Why did humans develop philosophy if it is not required for survival? The ideal soldier does not involve emotions in decisions because emotions hinder survival, why did evolution create something that does not aide survival?
Ants work together because of instinct. We work together because of emotion. Children are afraid of being alone in the dark. This is left over from our early evolution where we had a reason to be afraid. Fear is an emotion, and it is an important emotion that kept early humans together. Love is another one which served the same purpose.
Emotions were very much beneficial to humans. "I am near a tiger. This causes me to feel fear, and fear feels bad." Conclusion? Get the hell away from that tiger.
Emotions can very much be seen as a result of evolution.
Edit:
ASR, keep in mind, they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
Step near an ant and it runs wildly. It does not feel fear but recognizes danger. Fear does not help, the scientific question "Is this dangerous?" does. |
From the moon they looked down to see if we measured up |
|
|
|
ASR
Skeptic Friend
69 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 15:09:15 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by pleco
Right, whatever helps you sleep at night.
Look, I don't mean any ill intent, I appreciate developing my theory with you guys, it just seems like I was met with contempt from the word go because I argue creationism... |
From the moon they looked down to see if we measured up |
|
|
|
ASR
Skeptic Friend
69 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 15:20:41 [Permalink]
|
| I would like to note that no-one has pointed out anything other than science, philosophy, and the mix of the two that exists in the world today. No one has also refuted the ability to answer yes and no to a question at exactly the same time. These two elements of my theory are what keeps me holding my ground. If you want me to shut-up then attack those positions. |
From the moon they looked down to see if we measured up |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 15:22:01 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ASR
So once upon a time an ant mulched some leaves and left it for consumption later. When he returned he found more food. It did not ask why there was more food, just knew that putting food there made more food. New ants followed him to get leaves, and followed his example. They did not ask why, this was just the way things were done, and so it continued to today.
As it is not known how, nor even at what time this behavior appeared, your comment is no more than an unsupported speculation.
But could it never be known? I think that it could, if it were observed in other, modern, vegetarian species that hadn't previously known for it. The possibility is open because evolution never ceases, never rests.
Did you know that Termites were among the first, terrestrial arthropods to use chemical warfare? And that some species of them were the ancestors of cockroaches as well as Tom DeLay?
S'true.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 15:30:55 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ASR...
Look, I don't mean any ill intent, I appreciate developing my theory with you guys, it just seems like I was met with contempt from the word go because I argue creationism...
No, you haven't argued creationism, or anything at all for that matter, not in any cogent or organized fashion anyway. You said you were going to present an argument against evolution. You haven't. You have admitted that you are a poor communicator. That much is certain.
If you have an argument against evolution, post it. If you have an argument in favor of creationism, post it. Please include any evidence you may have available, and include references where possible.
If you are trying to say that the contemporary theory of evolution is not correct because humans have emotions, or philosophies, or some other particular trait that can't be explained by evolution, please put your thoughts in some rational, understandable form. Back up your thoughts with evidence, not just your personal guess about how things are or could/should be.
If you're just here to babble, (and you've provided much evidence for that possibility), you'll probably find many other forums out on the net where your babbling will bring you much more satisfaction.
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 15:32:25 [Permalink]
|
ASR's argument, as far as I can make out, is that humans should not be capable of abstract thought if they evolved through strictly material processes.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
ASR
Skeptic Friend
69 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 15:38:27 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
quote:
Originally posted by ASR
So once upon a time an ant mulched some leaves and left it for consumption later. When he returned he found more food. It did not ask why there was more food, just knew that putting food there made more food. New ants followed him to get leaves, and followed his example. They did not ask why, this was just the way things were done, and so it continued to today.
As it is not known how, nor even at what time this behavior appeared, your comment is no more than an unsupported speculation.
But could it never be known? I think that it could, if it were observed in other, modern, vegetarian species that hadn't previously known for it. The possibility is open because evolution never ceases, never rests.
Did you know that Termites were among the first, terrestrial arthropods to use chemical warfare? And that some species of them were the ancestors of cockroaches as well as Tom DeLay?
S'true.
My arguments are no more unsupported than claiming ants are philosophically capable. Again, I say try and find something other than science/philosophy/mix of the two that we can comprehend. Or answer yes and no to the same question simutaneously, the logic being that science is law dependent and cannot answer yes and no to the same question at the same time, the logical explanation as to why a computer crashes seeing as it only understands ones and zeros (yes and no conflict crashes program.) Humans are incapable of crashing thus the safety of the human brain is that it cannot process them at the same time. |
From the moon they looked down to see if we measured up |
|
|
|
ASR
Skeptic Friend
69 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 15:47:29 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by H. Humbert
ASR's argument, as far as I can make out, is that humans should not be capable of abstract thought if they evolved through strictly material processes.
Correct. Science could develop "Is my time worth something? (Yes/No)" but cannot comprehend "What is it worth?" The thought is that evolution which is law dependent, could not develop shades of grey, since there is no law governing that problem. It would have to develop an entirely new and foreign system for dealing with that situation, trying to use law to create not law. Is that clearer? |
From the moon they looked down to see if we measured up |
|
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 15:51:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ASR...
... the logical explanation as to why a computer crashes seeing as it only understands ones and zeros (yes and no conflict crashes program.)
Again, computers don't understand anything. You continue to provide supporting evidence that you have much in common with computers in this regard.
|
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
