• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

What made you find faith, or what turn against it?

LucidSDreamr said:
morality is simply a product of natural selection in social species.
Click to expand...
Well said. Good post.

And not to split hairs and I'm not disagreeing with anything you said, but I'd also suggest it's not just simply a product of natural selection. I admit I'm changing the context here, but I think it's important to note that it's also a word people pulled out of our asses- arguably like love, evil, etc- to slap on a certain something so we can assign meaning to it. Not that there's anything wrong with that necessarily. But in my view we overdo it and waste too much time and energy assigning meaning to various human characteristics.

It's easy for these conversations to spin off into oblivion over semantics and various subjectivities... context, mild differences in definitional interpretations, etc etc blah blah pussy dick lol blah blah, etc. Like, for example, I believe you and I are merely talking about morality. Not its origins or how it exists, necessarily.
 
LucidSDreamr said:
So morality (aka. Being nice) only exists because it favored survival.
Click to expand...
Well this is complete bollocks. You don't need niceness to ensure survival, all you really need is males full of hormones with no qualms. If it were true we would never have evolved past the chimpanzee stage.
 
-=SS=- said:
Well this is complete bollocks. You don't need niceness to ensure survival, all you really need is males full of hormones with no qualms. If it were true we would never have evolved past the chimpanzee stage.
Click to expand...
So a species forming cooperative groups to hunt gather defend and rear young has no advantage over a loner doing all this alone?

You have some extremely big gaps in understanding evolutions when it comes to social species if you don’t think there is power in numbers.

Why do fish school? Why do wolves form packs? Why do lions form prides? Just for fun?

Cooperation = being nice to the other members of your group
 
LucidSDreamr said:
You have some extremely big gaps in understanding evolutions when it comes to social species if you don’t think there is power in numbers. Why do fish school? Why do wolves form packs? Why do lions form prides? Just for fun?
Click to expand...
Yeah, and what the hell has any of that got to do with morality exactly. Group behaviour has nothing to do with being 'nice', it's pure efficiency for both offensive and defensive purposes.
 
-=SS=- said:
Well this is complete bollocks. You don't need niceness to ensure survival, all you really need is males full of hormones with no qualms. If it were true we would never have evolved past the chimpanzee stage.
Click to expand...

Well, for a start, we didn't evolve from chimpanzees. We had a common ancestor in the past, as did every living thing on Earth. This is a common misconception among the anti evolutionists. "Why are there still apes if we evolved from apes?" Species divergence from a common ancestors, that's why.


As for "You don't need niceness to ensure survival, all you really need is males full of hormones with no qualms". This is only true on an individual level. But for species that live in societal groups, evolution favours the group rather than the individual.


I had to attend a house that had rat problems, and the guy turned out to be a fuckin bible basher. He asked me why there are so many rats. So I told him that rats have evolved alongside humans for thousands of years and have become a commensal species that rely upon humans for their survival. So he said "so we've evolved from rats?" :frustrated:

These cunts boil my fuckin piss...
 
Last edited:
F.U.B.A.R. said:
This is a common misconception among the anti evolutionists.
Click to expand...
Never said I didn't believe in evolution, only that it isn't the full picture.
F.U.B.A.R. said:
This is only true on an individual level. But for species that live in societal groups, evolution favours the group rather than the individual.
Click to expand...
Which again has absolutely nothing to do with morality, but pure efficiency and conservation of energy.
 
-=SS=- said:
Never said I didn't believe in evolution, only that it isn't the full picture
Click to expand...

I didn't say you didn't believe in evolution, but it absolutely IS the full picture.


-=SS=- said:
Which again has absolutely nothing to do with morality, but pure efficiency and conservation of energy.
Click to expand...


So a group that has to live in harmony without ripping each other to bits isn't going to benefit from a sense of morality?

If anything, religion has promoted immorality with its greedy, power loving, warmongering, homophonic, misogynistic, intolerant bullshit!
 
Last edited:
F.U.B.A.R. said:
I didn't say you didn't believe in evolution, but it absolutely IS the full picture.
Click to expand...
Which is why language, and its relation to evolution, is perhaps the greatest mystery in all of science.

Darwinian evolution doesn't cut the mustard. It's part of the picture, but not all of it.
 
There's nothing special about language, all species communicate with each other, and there is a definite evolutionary advantage by doing so.

Perhaps Darwinian evolution doesn't explain everything, yet. But it outlines the basic principles which have yet to be disproven.


Another trope that boils my piss is: "but it's only a theory". That's another thing that the rat guy said to me. Had to explain that a scientific theory is a hypothesis that has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt...
 
F.U.B.A.R. said:
There's nothing special about language, all species communicate with each other, and there is a definite evolutionary advantage by doing so.
Click to expand...
There is no other species on this planet that has developed syntactical language besides us. Body language or gestures is not even remotely close to syntax based language, and that is the mystery science can't solve.

Body language isn't special, but verbal/written language absolutely is special. Science can not explain how we developed the physical structure for it (both generation and receiving), in parallel to the neurological changes needed to support it, as well as explaining how such a behaviour could arise against the pressures of individual and collective survival i.e. how it could displace the inherently trustworthy implicit body language communication. Then on top of that you have the mystery of syntax itself.

There is a quantum leap going from body language and simple vocal gestures, to actual language.
 
-=SS=- said:
There is no other species on this planet that has developed syntactical language besides us. Body language or gestures is not even remotely close to syntax based language, and that is the mystery science can't solve.

Body language isn't special, but verbal/written language absolutely is special. Science can not explain how we developed the physical structure for it (both generation and receiving), in parallel to the neurological changes needed to support it, as well as explaining how such a behaviour could arise against the pressures of individual and collective survival i.e. how it could displace the inherently trustworthy implicit body language communication. Then on top of that you have the mystery of syntax itself.

There is a quantum leap going from body language and simple vocal gestures, to actual language.
Click to expand...

Although written language is unique to humans (as far as we know), verbal communication is demonstrated in many mammalian species. Then there are other forms of communication, such as pheromones, favoured by insects.

Though I admit that the leap to sentience/consciousness has not been fully explained by evolutionary theory. Yet.
 
-=SS=- said:
Which again has absolutely nothing to do with morality, but pure efficiency and conservation of energy.
Click to expand...
You keep failing to understand after two ppl have explained to you that morality is a extremely simple

Thats all it is. Put all the human frills and extras onto it you want. But at the end of the day morality is nothing more than a deference of one’s selfish interests to another tribe member to remain in good graces with the group.
 
F.U.B.A.R. said:
I'd recommend reading anything by Richard Dawkins...
Click to expand...
He might be a great academic in his field, but beyond that.. his philosophical arguments are so weak it's embarrassing. Sure, it's fine ammunition against some of the idiocy of the Christian religious structure, but that is the only reason why he's gotten as much attention as he has.. no one is reading his material for its philosophical weight. Except perhaps those who like the echo chamber of the materialist reductionist paradigm.

But unfortunately for him, this isn't 1859. We have the internet. There are thousands, perhaps millions of people out there now able to communicate experiences that completely shred the material reductionist paradigm. It's wilful ignorance at this point to deny it. There's just too much smoke visible now to pretend there isn't a fire.

The notion that genetics in hand with evolution can explain everything is just bygone fantasy.
 
I randomly stumbled upon this quote and it struck me, so I post it here now.

"I would rather spend eternity in Hell with my kin, than an eternity in Heaven full of beggars."

-Redbad, the last Pagan King of Frisia (modern Netherlands)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top