Is Evolution a Dangerous Idea? If so, why?

@spendius,

Quote:

The word "nature" has two meanings for educated people.

I did not say "human nature"...I said "nature" as:
2--The entire system of things with all their properties in the absence of human intervention.

Is this clear?

2 Replies

@Jason Proudmoore,

No, it isn't. Hunter gatherers don't intervene. They are an aspect of nature. Intervention comes in with religion.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

fm and jason are in particularly great form today.

Follow nature then Ed. Then you can wag your tail.

2 Replies

@spendius,

You begin to resemble the 'squashed boneless snail.'

2 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Pass.

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

No, it isn't.

What isn't?

Quote:

Hunter gatherers don't intervene. They are an aspect of nature. Intervention comes in with religion.

What the hell are you talking about ? The term "human nature" is what humans do concerning the way they think and act. "Nature", in its entire context, refers to the principle of the universe....that encompasses "reality"...what is real...opposed to what is not, like human creativity concerning myths and legends, product of human ignorance, trying to understand the world using intuition...get it?

1 Reply

I see no plausible basis for exempting human intervention, as in the locution "in the absence of human intervention." Humans are a part of nature, as surely as are any other animals. It is an ideological conceit to pretend otherwise, and whether intended or not, an inheritance of religious superstition.

Human beings are a part of nature, and act within it--they don't "intervene," because they are not separate from nature.

0 Replies

I was so glad when I saw that Setanta was the last poster. Ah! An intelligent post . . . then, as I read, I became familiar with Jason, who is new to me. Of course, farmerman held down the fort.

I think an evening in a great pub in which Jason, Setanta and Farmer held court would be entertaining and enlightening. I have a sneaking suspicion, however, that spendius has been bounced out of more than one pub.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

You begin to resemble the 'squashed boneless snail.'

That reminded me that Prof. Dawkins had said that someone who took a different view was "lower than an earthworm."

From top to bottom of the evolutionary hierarchy it's just the same.

When you started the thread Ed you might have explained that you only wanted people to contribute to it who agreed with you then it could have folded in half a page like that one I drew attention to and which must have made A2k very little money.

1 Reply

@Jason Proudmoore,

Quote:

The term "human nature" is what humans do concerning the way they think and act. "Nature", in its entire context, refers to the principle of the universe....that encompasses "reality"...what is real...opposed to what is not, like human creativity concerning myths and legends, product of human ignorance, trying to understand the world using intuition...get it?

If that's how you define Nature then that is what it is to you. It's circular. And obvious.

The debate is about whether evolution is a dangerous idea. The question presupposes that there are divergent views on the matter and thus presupposes that Nature is two differnt things or as many different things as there are different views, each with their own consequences, on any subject where divergent views exist. There are thus as many Natures as there are people.

Such a defininition is too vague to have meaning. You might just as well say that Nature is Everything we can perceive. Great!! I'm really enlightened.

1 Reply

@Jason Proudmoore,

As Setanta has me on Ignore JP I presume he is responding to your post and, for obvious reasons, there's no point my answering him.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

You can have all the sneaking suspicions you like POM. It makes no odds to me.

I'm sure you would enjoy an evening with the crew you mention. I hope they can take the hint. You would certainly have it explained to you how clever and important they are.

0 Replies

@spendius,

I don't want only people who agree with me. But, in your case, after all these pages, you have yet to break any new ground. Why should I play your game to infinity?

I referenced the Joyce 'snail' passage, because you referred to me as having a tail. Turn about, eh?

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

I referenced the Joyce 'snail' passage, because you referred to me as having a tail.

I didn't did I? When was that? I apologise if I did.

1 Reply

@spendius,

That's okay. No hard feelings. I have been guilty of such but don't really mean any harm.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

Thanks Ed but I am interested in where I did such a thing. It isn't my style at all.

0 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Quote:
fm and jason are in particularly great form today.

Follow nature then Ed. Then you can wag your tail.

Right here, mr spendi

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

The use of the word saint has been distorted by the RCC. (probably so they can say look who comes out of our church)
A saint is a believer in Yeshua.
Momma Teresa was indeed a saint.

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

If that's how you define Nature then that is what it is to you. It's circular. And obvious.

This is the source of all this misunderstanding...an early post I wrote intended to explain what seems to be the unexplainable:

Quote:

Would you say that the Bible is compatible with reality, with nature?...if you agree that the Bible conforms to nature, would you agree that the Earth is flat, that the "firmament" is filled with water, that the human body can be possessed by spirits or demons, that magical enchantment is factual, and other nonsensical, biblical notions that are incompatible with nature and have been refuted by science? In that case...the Bible is as wrong as it can get.

Since whatever humans do is considered "artificial" ... even though it is natural ( it is considered part of nature), I chose to exclude human intuition (which "explains" nature, the universe by resorting to myths) as part of reality for the sake of clarity...if I said that the human creation of myths is not "real"...I mean to say that it doesn't conform with nature, reality...even if the creation of myths by humans is natural, it is not compatible with nature.
(Damn it! I hate absolutism)

Quote:

The debate is about whether evolution is a dangerous idea. The question presupposes that there are divergent views on the matter and thus presupposes that Nature is two differnt things or as many different things as there are different views, each with their own consequences, on any subject where divergent views exist. There are thus as many Natures as there are people.

I don't think that biological evolution is dangerous...what would it be?...it's the best explanation about how life is so diverse on this planet. Why would this be dangerous for humanity, much less for creationists? Creationists are very good at compartmentalizing beliefs. For example, microbiologist Ken Miller (one who testified at the kitzmiller vs Dover trial against Intelligent Design) is a catholic; renown Paleontologist Robert T. Bakker is a Pentecostal pastor; and Francis Collins, physician-geneticist and contributor to the Human Genome Project, is a Christian...they just interpret the Bible differently than literalists. Those three believe in Biological evolution, and also believe in God....there.

Quote:

Such a defininition is too vague to have meaning. You might just as well say that Nature is Everything we can perceive. Great!! I'm really enlightened.

Just used "nature" the way other people use it, by excluding human actions, which are regarded as "artificial"...for the sake of clarity, to point out the difference between imagination (myths) and reality...They're both natural, but they're not compatible with each other....do you understand this, Spend?

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

As Setanta has me on Ignore JP I presume he is responding to your post and, for obvious reasons, there's no point my answering him.

Why would Setanta ignore you?

3 Replies

Is Evolution a Dangerous Idea? If so, why?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know