38
   

Is Evolution a Dangerous Idea? If so, why?

 
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Tue 27 Apr, 2010 07:36 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
The Evangelicals, a much smaller, but mire vocal minority, dont pander to highly educated people.


The usual snobbery. Some would argue that you are not "highly educated" fm. I am one of them. But it's a neat piece of self-flattery. Attack the Bible and you can consider yourself "highly educated". The real deal in bullshit. Passed on from generation to generation.

And "highly educated" people are pandered to plenty by other institutions. What else have "lowly educated" people got to pander to them. They are **** on from here to eternity and you ought to be glad somebody panders to them or they might rise up in their masses. "Highly educated" people are totally dependent on them. And they mark their own exam papers too. And not only do they not mark births, marriages and deaths with dignity but they scoff at those who do without ever once thinking how those events might be depicted by somebody who knows how to really scoff.

I can just see you awarding high marks to students who regurgitate the **** you tell them. Sociologically the term "highly educated" is statistically correlated with parents with large houses and a desperate need to use their kids to put forth the superiority of their genetic material which they themselves have failed to do. It is only tenuously connected with intelligence as a biological coincidence.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Tue 27 Apr, 2010 08:54 am
@spendius,
If you dont like the truth dont stand for the qustion. The avg ed of the Evangelicals is barely high school and of those who grad college, only the "manipulators" bother with anything advanced

Quote:
I can just see you awarding high marks to students who regurgitate the **** you tell them.
My tests are usually 70% mathematics and calculus, (subjects that I understand are beyond your own "rote" mind)
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Apr, 2010 04:27 am
@rosborne979,
Quote:
Is naturalism a dangerous belief system?
.

It is ,if your worldview requires that its "rule book" must be regarded as fully factual. Not only is evolution a dangerous concept, but so is geology, physics, chemistry, history,anthropology and biology
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Apr, 2010 09:37 am
Use your computers to listen to OnPoint, the NPR talk show, today. THe discussion is based on Stephen Hawking's avoid aliens pronouncement and I think everyone here would find it fascinating.
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Wed 28 Apr, 2010 12:41 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
My tests are usually 70% mathematics and calculus, (subjects that I understand are beyond your own "rote" mind)


Oh yeah!!

You are not only unaware that there is no such thing as mathematics as such but you resist ever finding out.

There are as many number worlds as there are cultures. You are more dogmatically Christian than I am. The only number world you think has any validity is the Christian one.

Number is like word. Both comprise, denote and fence off in a mechanical demarcation of impressions of the world around. The non-soul. The other. The alien. And these impressions are actually not containable like that. They cannot be fenced off because they are contiguous with everything else in nature.

Galilleo said that Nature is " written in mathematical language" but Nature is seen, felt and thought in a different way in different cultures.

The American use of "math" to denote the skill of thinking practically in figures is not to be confused with mathematics which is an art and thus metaphysical and is thinking in numbers. Not working out mortgage repayments. I assume that the usage is meant to flatter everyone, like many another usage in American education, "masters", "major in", "graduate", "sophomore" and such like, so that they can attach to themselves bits of the cachet associated with "mathematics" when all they are really doing is arithmetic and sums.

Cathedrals, Doric temples, pyramids, mosques and pagodas are mathematics in stone. All different and quite profoundly so.

Can you find the Christian space representation of oil painting in the Classical icon and statue or in the dissolving landscapes of Chinese watercolours or in the garish symbolism of Amerindian tradition or in the sense of the grotesque and fantastic in Hundu depictions or in the mosaics and filigrees of the Magian world?

And all of these spill over into institutions, manners, ceremonials, musical tone fields, ornament and language and because they are all expressions of, for want of a better expression, the style of the soul of the particular culture.

Such soul styles depend entirely on the culture which nourished them and your mathematics and calculus is Christian from tip to toe. It stands in the same relation to Classical mathematics as the moon rocket does to the wheelbarrow. Or, dare I say, lingerie to the breech cloth.

Your denial of Christian theology, one assumes in the service of certain needs which I will forbear mentioning, is the real source of all your confusions.

The idea of Classical geometry was actualised in architecture and ornament long before it was codified in Euclidean theorems just as the Gothic styles long pre-dated the mathematics of the infinitesimal calculus.

Poor old Kant fell into the same confusion. His a priori, necessities and universal validities, clean forgot to include his own Christian socialisation which was, as you keep trying to tell us, neither necessary nor universally valid but a "feeling" and thus alterable. A race feeling one might say. A set of intellectual prepossessions, an absurdity, which are on Ignore.

It is a rare man who can have his intellectual prepossessions discussed in a calm and measured manner, and, I'm sorry to say, an even rarer woman.

Such considerations as these, which I am merely skating over, leads to the conclusion that any idea of a constant structure of the intellect is an illusion and that there are other ways of knowing and that universal truth and universal error cannot be dogmatically distinguished.

They can only be left to fight it out in the Darwinian struggle which can be said to be a valid universal necessity and a destiny(assuming we are alone in the universe--who knows what to say if we are not) and which is equally dangerous to each and every culture soul. Culture might be defined as the setting aside of such a destiny. A strict Darwinian can have no culture soul although he might act one for social reasons.

This points to Spengler's error in accusing Darwin of being shallow and limited. What danger would exist if Darwinianism was shallow and limited.

The general thesis is proved by your own capacity to identify a work of art, a painting, a relief, an ornament, a dress, etc with the culture it came from. Usually instantly. Experts can identify localities of sub-cultures likewise.

You are talking about Christian mathematics fm. Religious in essence.
edgarblythe
 
  3  
Reply Wed 28 Apr, 2010 01:40 pm
If fm said he rescued a child from an onrushing bus, you would look for some way to **** on it, spendi.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Apr, 2010 03:10 pm
@edgarblythe,
I would not.

And he's **** on me time without number with never a peep or even a squeak from you.

And I didn't **** on him either. I was trying, on behalf of his students, to educate him a bit. Science observes and dissects. It doesn't preach. It's cool.

And I stuck up for Darwin too.
edgarblythe
 
  3  
Reply Wed 28 Apr, 2010 03:20 pm
@spendius,
With friends like you - - - Razz
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Apr, 2010 03:26 pm
For many years, I have done a mental exercise while doing household tasks: I imagine what the world would be like without Christianity.

So, this thread inspired a variant. Imagine the SEcond Coming, which Religious REvisionists have dubbed the Rapture. Christ announces who his post-Biblical prophets were. Darwin was among them. Humans were supposed to accept Darwin and those who do not are among the condemned.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Apr, 2010 03:56 pm
@plainoldme,
And what results did you imagine?
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Wed 28 Apr, 2010 04:58 pm
@farmerman,
Game shows in which nubile ladies lie across big brass beds offering encouragement while men fight over who gets to shag them with no referees.

What else? You don't think Darwinian science allows for fastest finger first on which is the world's longest river or who was Prime Minister when Caractacus was a lad do you?
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Apr, 2010 07:22 pm
@edgarblythe,
Its the Darwinian way though Mister Ed. If buses are faster they survive to evolve. Very Happy Someone has to keep the herd thinned and the young, the old and the sick are the first to go. It is a fair system unless you are young, old or sick. Applying religious principles to evolution is not very scientific. If it is not your child then it doesnt matter that the bus wins.
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Apr, 2010 07:24 pm
@plainoldme,
Quote:
THe discussion is based on Stephen Hawking's avoid aliens pronouncement
Exactly how is one supposed to "avoid" aliens when they are busy anal probing everyone ??
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  0  
Reply Wed 28 Apr, 2010 07:30 pm
@spendius,
A post designed for those who think Spendi....well said. But who will challenge it ? There are too many swine to throw pearls amongst all of them.
0 Replies
 
Xenoche
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Apr, 2010 08:51 pm
So apart from spendi vomiting diarrhea while Ion is giving him a blow job, has this thread evolved?

No?
Ozmagod darwin was wrong!
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Apr, 2010 08:58 pm
@Xenoche,
They are like sports. Not likely to continue the line.
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  0  
Reply Wed 28 Apr, 2010 10:05 pm
@Xenoche,
Quote:
So apart from spendi vomiting diarrhea while Ion is giving him a blow job, has this thread evolved? No? Ozmagod darwin was wrong!
Dont know if it was worth your time staying up all night to think of that one.....
Xenoche
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Apr, 2010 11:15 pm
@Ionus,
Quote:
Dont know if it was worth your time staying up all night to think of that one.....

Dont know if it was worth your time staying up all night to think of that one.....

Don't I feel witty...
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Thu 29 Apr, 2010 03:29 am
@Xenoche,
Quote:
So apart from spendi vomiting diarrhea while Ion is giving him a blow job, has this thread evolved?


Of course it has evolved. Evolution is deterministic. It goes on all around us.

Asking the question is proof you haven't the first idea, and the simplest, which is saying something in that science, what it means.

Look how you've evolved. You started out with a nappy full of **** and here you are now all grown up and matured and going around spouting words you don't know the meaning of, mixing up your metaphors alarmingly and exposing the peccadillos of your fevered imagination for all to see.

Vomiting, diarrhoea and blow jobs squeezed into a short ejaculation is a bit obsessive I should have thought.

And to top it off a misreading of my post where I showed that only Darwin and his scatological and sex-mad followers have an a priori position which stands up to scrutiny.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Apr, 2010 04:58 am
@spendius,
The test here is to decide whether this quote is irony or po-faced scientific wonder-tripe of the first magnitude.

Quote:
Don’t talk to aliens, warns Stephen Hawking
Hawking has depicted what kinds of alien could be out there

THE aliens are out there and Earth had better watch out, at least according to Stephen Hawking. He has suggested that extraterrestrials are almost certain to exist " but that instead of seeking them out, humanity should be doing all it that can to avoid any contact.

The suggestions come in a new documentary series in which Hawking, one of the world’s leading scientists, will set out his latest thinking on some of the universe’s greatest mysteries.

Alien life, he will suggest, is almost certain to exist in many other parts of the universe: not just in planets, but perhaps in the centre of stars or even floating in interplanetary space.

Hawking’s logic on aliens is, for him, unusually simple. The universe, he points out, has 100 billion galaxies, each containing hundreds of millions of stars. In such a big place, Earth is unlikely to be the only planet where life has evolved.

“To my mathematical brain, the numbers alone make thinking about aliens perfectly rational,” he said. “The real challenge is to work out what aliens might actually be like.”

The answer, he suggests, is that most of it will be the equivalent of microbes or simple animals " the sort of life that has dominated Earth for most of its history.

One scene in his documentary for the Discovery Channel shows herds of two-legged herbivores browsing on an alien cliff-face where they are picked off by flying, yellow lizard-like predators. Another shows glowing fluorescent aquatic animals forming vast shoals in the oceans thought to underlie the thick ice coating Europa, one of the moons of Jupiter.

Such scenes are speculative, but Hawking uses them to lead on to a serious point: that a few life forms could be intelligent and pose a threat. Hawking believes that contact with such a species could be devastating for humanity.

He suggests that aliens might simply raid Earth for its resources and then move on: “We only have to look at ourselves to see how intelligent life might develop into something we wouldn’t want to meet. I imagine they might exist in massive ships, having used up all the resources from their home planet. Such advanced aliens would perhaps become nomads, looking to conquer and colonise whatever planets they can reach.”

He concludes that trying to make contact with alien races is “a little too risky”. He said: “If aliens ever visit us, I think the outcome would be much as when Christopher Columbus first landed in America, which didn’t turn out very well for the Native Americans.”

The completion of the documentary marks a triumph for Hawking, now 68, who is paralysed by motor neurone disease and has very limited powers of communication. The project took him and his producers three years, during which he insisted on rewriting large chunks of the script and checking the filming.

John Smithson, executive producer for Discovery, said: “He wanted to make a programme that was entertaining for a general audience as well as scientific and that’s a tough job, given the complexity of the ideas involved.”

Hawking has suggested the possibility of alien life before but his views have been clarified by a series of scientific breakthroughs, such as the discovery, since 1995, of more than 450 planets orbiting distant stars, showing that planets are a common phenomenon.

So far, all the new planets found have been far larger than Earth, but only because the telescopes used to detect them are not sensitive enough to detect Earth-sized bodies at such distances.

Another breakthrough is the discovery that life on Earth has proven able to colonise its most extreme environments. If life can survive and evolve there, scientists reason, then perhaps nowhere is out of bounds.

Hawking’s belief in aliens places him in good scientific company. In his recent Wonders of the Solar System BBC series, Professor Brian Cox backed the idea, too, suggesting Mars, Europa and Titan, a moon of Saturn, as likely places to look.

Similarly, Lord Rees, the astronomer royal, warned in a lecture earlier this year that aliens might prove to be beyond human understanding.

“I suspect there could be life and intelligence out there in forms we can’t conceive,” he said. “Just as a chimpanzee can’t understand quantum theory, it could be there are aspects of reality that are beyond the capacity of our brains.”


I'm for irony. The alternative is too horrible to contemplate.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 11/27/2024 at 02:29:53