Imagine for a moment...

[rowo87]

Imagine for a moment, a world where all religious people actually apply their religion and love others as God demands of them. That they love thy neighbor as themselves and treat others as they want to be treated.

Now imagine that all non-religous people who believe in Evolution act only to benefit the continuation and betterment of the species.

YOU WILL SEE IN THE END THAT THE CONCLUSION FOR BOTH SETS OF PEOPLE IS THE SAME!

Therefore, the argument between religion and evolution is essentially moot.

[thrice54]

There are ideals and there 'is' reality.

An argument can make rational sense when it stands alone, but sometimes in the face of other evidence it falls apart.

[rowo87]

Originally Posted by thrice54

There are ideals and there 'is' reality.

An argument can make rational sense when it stands alone, but sometimes in the face of other evidence it falls apart.

Well, reality has to be defined somehow by rules. The only rules we can truly say are from God are the rules of physics.

Now the "RULES OF PHYSICS" which cannot be disputed as existing; has worked ,for reason or not, to create LIFE. Now, despite the fact that we are created by the rules of physics we are also punished by them. The laws also inhibit us from traveling faster than the speed of light. Or from being in two places at once, or from flying into black holes. We can barely even make it to the bottom of our own ocean...

So we are alive in this world that undoubtedly has rules and the only way we can learn about it is to experience it with our senses.

Our senses give us the information we need and they are the only way we are about to explore or manipulate our world.

So what do our senses tell us? Our senses tell us to survive. To do everything possible to survive and to have offspring and to do everything possible to make sure they survive as well. That is our instinct. Our natural born instinct that comes at birth and grows into adulthood

So now we have a world with rules and life with instincts (aka "Rules" for survival).

So now the world is bound by the rules of physics and our species (and all others) are bound to the rules of survival.

These are the only rules in the Universe.

So now we see the perpetual never ending cycle of life and death in its entirety and we ask "WHY"?

Well, we are here to create whatever it is we choose to create.

We are Life. We are Creation. We paint upon the blank canvas of the Universe.

[joe123]

thats deep thinking right there damn haha but ur right

[SleepyShoegazer]

Yeah, until the religious say the non-religious are doing it for the wrong reasons and they'll burn for all eternity.

But y'know. It's good in theory.

[rowo87]

Originally Posted by SleepyShoegazer

Yeah, until the religious say the non-religious are doing it for the wrong reasons and they'll burn for all eternity.

But y'know. It's good in theory.

Which is why religious people are stupid and the rest are stupid for arguing back.

It's all so obvious to me...

SMOKE A BLUNT!! haha

[Shade]

Originally Posted by rowo87

Well, reality has to be defined somehow by rules. The only rules we can truly say are from God are the rules of physics.

Now the "RULES OF PHYSICS" which cannot be disputed as existing; has worked ,for reason or not, to create LIFE. Now, despite the fact that we are created by the rules of physics we are also punished by them. The laws also inhibit us from traveling faster than the speed of light. Or from being in two places at once, or from flying into black holes. We can barely even make it to the bottom of our own ocean...

So we are alive in this world that undoubtedly has rules and the only way we can learn about it is to experience it with our senses.

Our senses give us the information we need and they are the only way we are about to explore or manipulate our world.

So what do our senses tell us? Our senses tell us to survive. To do everything possible to survive and to have offspring and to do everything possible to make sure they survive as well. That is our instinct. Our natural born instinct that comes at birth and grows into adulthood

So now we have a world with rules and life with instincts (aka "Rules" for survival).

So now the world is bound by the rules of physics and our species (and all others) are bound to the rules of survival.

These are the only rules in the Universe.

So now we see the perpetual never ending cycle of life and death in its entirety and we ask "WHY"?

Well, we are here to create whatever it is we choose to create.

We are Life. We are Creation. We paint upon the blank canvas of the Universe.

I'm not a fan of generalizations.

The guy who puts a bullet through his own head or takes a leap off the top of a building isn't concerned with surviving. Quite the contrary.

Some couples, or individuals, are incapable of reproducing. Others simply have no desire to have children. It's hardly a universal desire to want kids. And then there's some people who give their kids up, abandon them, abort them, or kill them after birth. Things aren't as universally black and white as you'd like to make them out to be, I'm afraid.

Physics aren't necessarily from God, especially if God doesn't exist. And science has the potential to change and evolve just like everything else as we continue to persist and study. There was a time when people thought the world was flat. There was a time when we could not fly to the moon. Things change.

To me the universe only has one true rule, and that rule is change. Nothing stays the same forever. There is no why.

I'm not a fan of religion either, it's proven to be little more than a money sink with a political agenda and a catalyst for mass murder whilst continuing to segregate peoples from each other. Religion is ultimately unnecessary as any and all the good it is capable of can be easily achieved outside of it, and probably in better ways with fewer drawbacks, at that. I can't think of a single thing that religion provides that we cannot generate without it, but that doesn't stop religion from taking and taking and taking. Seems more like a cancer to me.

[rowo87]

Originally Posted by Shade

I'm not a fan of generalizations.

The guy who puts a bullet through his own head or takes a leap off the top of a building isn't concerned with surviving. Quite the contrary.

Some couples, or individuals, are incapable of reproducing. Others simply have no desire to have children. It's hardly a universal desire to want kids. And then there's some people who give their kids up, abandon them, abort them, or kill them after birth. Things aren't as universally black and white as you'd like to make them out to be, I'm afraid.

Physics aren't necessarily from God, especially if God doesn't exist. And science has the potential to change and evolve just like everything else as we continue to persist and study. There was a time when people thought the world was flat. There was a time when we could not fly to the moon. Things change.


To me the universe only has one true rule, and that rule is change. Nothing stays the same forever. There is no why.

I'm not a fan of religion either, it's proven to be little more than a money sink with a political agenda and a catalyst for mass murder whilst continuing to segregate peoples from each other. Religion is ultimately unnecessary as any and all the good it is capable of can be easily achieved outside of it, and probably in better ways with fewer drawbacks, at that. I can't think of a single thing that religion provides that we cannot generate without it, but that doesn't stop religion from taking and taking and taking. Seems more like a cancer to me.

Ha, u call upon the ultimate paradox of existence. Which unfortunately makes evil necessary. The paradox is that for something to exist there has to be an opposite. In order for happiness to exist the opposite has to exist otherwise there would be nothing relevant to hold happiness too. You cannot be happy without knowing sadness. You cannot Have proud without Shame. You can not have Love without Hate. You cannot have Life without Death.

[YEM]

Those are but relations, your comparing life with death. They are relevant in their terms, but ultimatley they are one of the same thing. You're right though, duality. Try thinking about non-duality though, or the combination of both duality and non-duality. Realize that both dualities are ONE thing rather than seperate and TwO.

[rowo87]

Originally Posted by YEM

Those are but relations, your comparing life with death. They are relevant in their terms, but ultimatley they are one of the same thing. You're right though, duality. Try thinking about non-duality though, or the combination of both duality and non-duality. Realize that both dualities are ONE thing rather than seperate and TwO.

That would be the same as saying Happiness and Sadness are the same...

[JBrady]

Originally Posted by rowo87

Imagine for a moment, a world where all religious people actually apply their religion and love others as God demands of them. That they love thy neighbor as themselves and treat others as they want to be treated.

Now imagine that all non-religous people who believe in Evolution act only to benefit the continuation and betterment of the species.

YOU WILL SEE IN THE END THAT THE CONCLUSION FOR BOTH SETS OF PEOPLE IS THE SAME!

Therefore, the argument between religion and evolution is essentially moot.

I disagree and believe the outcomes would be opposite of each other.

To show ultimate love and caring for all people (essentially acting with the compassion of "god"), while noble, is the opposite of one of the most basic laws of nature: survival of the fittest. A society like this would essentially be the strong propping up and taking care of the weak. With the weak not having to work to take care of themselves, they could easily multiply because they have much more free time to procreate. The opposite would happen to the strong. Their energy would be spent taking care of others leaving less time to worry about themselves. Eventually there would be too many weak to take care of, putting strain on the society and eventually leading to its downfall (kind of like an extreme version of socialism).

Then you have the strict evolution view. There are pretty good theories that evolution isn't for the betterment of the species as you say, but for the betterment of the individual, which on a large scale makes things better for the species as a whole. The idea that evolution is for the species comes about because of animals exhibiting altruistic behavior that makes it seem like they are sacrificing themselves for the good of others, but they are really just the suckers who weren't smart enough to save their own butt. Obviously this method works well or else we wouldn't be here.

[YEM]

Originally Posted by rowo87

That would be the same as saying Happiness and Sadness are the same...

In relative terms they may be different, but ultimately and absolutely they are the same SPECTRUM.

[rowo87]

Originally Posted by YEM

In relative terms they may be different, but ultimately and absolutely they are the same SPECTRUM.

I suppose you could say they are in the same spectrum as to say they are both Emotions, yes that is true...

Originally Posted by JBrady

I disagree and believe the outcomes would be opposite of each other.

To show ultimate love and caring for all people (essentially acting with the compassion of "god"), while noble, is the opposite of one of the most basic laws of nature: survival of the fittest. A society like this would essentially be the strong propping up and taking care of the weak. With the weak not having to work to take care of themselves, they could easily multiply because they have much more free time to procreate. The opposite would happen to the strong. Their energy would be spent taking care of others leaving less time to worry about themselves. Eventually there would be too many weak to take care of, putting strain on the society and eventually leading to its downfall (kind of like an extreme version of socialism).

Then you have the strict evolution view. There are pretty good theories that evolution isn't for the betterment of the species as you say, but for the betterment of the individual, which on a large scale makes things better for the species as a whole. The idea that evolution is for the species comes about because of animals exhibiting altruistic behavior that makes it seem like they are sacrificing themselves for the good of others, but they are really just the suckers who weren't smart enough to save their own butt. Obviously this method works well or else we wouldn't be here.

Maybe you watch National Geographic, maybe you don't. But I think NG is one of the best channels on TV. Now you may or may not have seen the documentary of the single lioness that had been cast out from her pride.

During her time alone she comes across a baby antelope who had also been abandoned.

Now this lion had several choices, the lion could kill and eat the antelope, it could even just leave it alone. But the lion actually adopted the baby antelope.

They followed each other each day even to the point where they slept side by side.

The lion treated the antelope exactly how a mother lioness would treat a cub.

Now perhaps this was only a mistake of identity and the lion thought the antelope was a cub, but I think we all know a lion can tell the difference...

In the end the baby antelope was killed and eaten by a larger male lion while the lioness tried desperately to save it...

Now what part of adopting an antelope helps promote the survival of the lion?
If the lion (and all life as you say) was designed only to protect itself, well than what benefit would it have from adopting an antelope?

Love is not just a mistake of evolution...

[thrice54]

Originally Posted by rowo87

Well, reality has to be defined somehow by rules. The only rules we can truly say are from God are the rules of physics.

Now the "RULES OF PHYSICS" which cannot be disputed as existing; has worked ,for reason or not, to create LIFE. Now, despite the fact that we are created by the rules of physics we are also punished by them. The laws also inhibit us from traveling faster than the speed of light. Or from being in two places at once, or from flying into black holes. We can barely even make it to the bottom of our own ocean...

So we are alive in this world that undoubtedly has rules and the only way we can learn about it is to experience it with our senses.

Our senses give us the information we need and they are the only way we are about to explore or manipulate our world.

So what do our senses tell us? Our senses tell us to survive. To do everything possible to survive and to have offspring and to do everything possible to make sure they survive as well. That is our instinct. Our natural born instinct that comes at birth and grows into adulthood

So now we have a world with rules and life with instincts (aka "Rules" for survival).

So now the world is bound by the rules of physics and our species (and all others) are bound to the rules of survival.

These are the only rules in the Universe.

So now we see the perpetual never ending cycle of life and death in its entirety and we ask "WHY"?

Well, we are here to create whatever it is we choose to create.

We are Life. We are Creation. We paint upon the blank canvas of the Universe.

There are many conflicting views in this post. First you say that reality is defined by rules and that the rules are from god. Yet, later you say we have free agency and that everything is created by us, I assume you mean within the limitations of physics. Although, someone or something else has 'decided' (I wont even argue for this because I'm not sure what really governs how or why certain physical rules are as they are) upon the rules and our limitations.

The rules of physics can be disputed.

The rules of physics which we have come to know by testing out theories we've figured come upon through observation. The rules of physics are only know to us through our ability to examine and reexamine our position in our particular historical circumstance based upon our knowledge of the world and our ability to at least in terms of physic test the limits of that knowledge.

The theory of gravity has not remained the same since its conception. First, it is simply things falling, then they are pulled to the earth because of its size (small things are attracted to big things), then you have Einstein's relativity and the fabric of space time. Those rules of physics are disputed all the time that's the job of any good physicist or scientist.

Aside from this it just seems like your are making a lot of bold assumptions. In terms of the paradox of existence, you talked about the existence of physics, what is other then physics what allows order of that sort to exist. Some say disorder. If you want to examine a brilliant metaphysical argument for evil I would suggest Proclus.

You seem to be trying to make some kind of metaphysical argument. Although I'm really not sure where your going with it.

[rowo87]

Originally Posted by thrice54

There are many conflicting views in this post. First you say that reality is defined by rules and that the rules are from god. Yet, later you say we have free agency and that everything is created by us, I assume you mean within the limitations of physics. Although, someone or something else has 'decided' (I wont even argue for this because I'm not sure what really governs how or why certain physical rules are as they are) upon the rules and our limitations.

The rules of physics can be disputed.

The rules of physics which we have come to know by testing out theories we've figured come upon through observation. The rules of physics are only know to us through our ability to examine and reexamine our position in our particular historical circumstance based upon our knowledge of the world and our ability to at least in terms of physic test the limits of that knowledge.

The theory of gravity has not remained the same since its conception. First, it is simply things falling, then they are pulled to the earth because of its size (small things are attracted to big things), then you have Einstein's relativity and the fabric of space time. Those rules of physics are disputed all the time that's the job of any good physicist or scientist.

Aside from this it just seems like your are making a lot of bold assumptions. In terms of the paradox of existence, you talked about the existence of physics, what is other then physics what allows order of that sort to exist. Some say disorder. If you want to examine a brilliant metaphysical argument for evil I would suggest Proclus.

You seem to be trying to make some kind of metaphysical argument. Although I'm really not sure where your going with it.

Forgive me for saying that the rules of physics are from God I used that term merely for lack of a better word. By saying God I mean it only as a placeholder for the idea of a creator or whatever it is one chooses to accept as their perferred method of creation.

Now, the TRUE rules of physics cannot be disputed, however, our understanding of them can be disputed. When you argue about Gravity and all other physical conundrums you are merely arguing about your understanding of them. Our knowledge of the truth or lack there of does not change the fact that their IS a truth.

It is truly language itself that limits us and most from truly understanding what the world is.

We define ourselves and everything we see and experience with words which are effecient for the transmission of ideas but are severly flawed in their limitations.

Love doesn't require four letters to exist. It does not require the sound your lips and vocal cords create to speak it. It does not even require your belief in it to exist.