User Tag List

First 5678 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 73

  1. #61
    likes this gromit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    6,652

    Default

    Oh I meant 'we' as in humankind. Like in the general sense. Were we created or did we evolve? I don't know, and I don't know that it reeeeeally matters that much actually.
    Your kisses, sweeter than honey. But guess what, so is my money.

  2. #62
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gromit View Post
    Oh I meant 'we' as in humankind. Like in the general sense. Were we created or did we evolve? I don't know, and I don't know that it reeeeeally matters that much actually.
    When you are asked whether the president of the United States of America is a man or a woman, why do you think it safe to answer that it is a man? If you apply the principle that lies in your answer to the above question, it becomes much easier to decide between evolution and creation.

  3. #63
    Post Human Post Qlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    When you are asked whether the president of the United States of America is a man or a woman, why do you think it safe to answer that it is a man? If you apply the principle that lies in your answer to the above question, it becomes much easier to decide between evolution and creation.
    Humanity has believed in creation for so long precisely because it's so easy to believe. Evolution without any kind of directing influence takes a much less safe leap, if the subject happens to be important to you.

  4. #64
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,130

    Default

    The principle is not 'because it is easy to believe'.

  5. #65
    Post Human Post Qlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    The principle is not 'because it is easy to believe'.
    You were appealing to common sense which relies on making coarse judgements on accepted fact. Evolution is the type of thing that can't really be understood this way.

  6. #66
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qlip View Post
    You were appealing to common sense [...].
    No.

  7. #67
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kraska View Post

    Creationism says that God created life on Earth while Evolutionism says the man evolved from the monkey (correct me if I'm wrong).
    You are wrong, but I lack the energy to correct that huge wrongdom over the Ocean
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

  8. #68
    Senior Member ICUP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,793

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gromit View Post
    . Were we created or did we evolve? I don't know, and I don't know that it reeeeeally matters that much actually.
    Pretty much what I think....
    Although I lie on the side of evolution. I can't prove either, unfortunately, but even if I could, Idk that it would make a difference anyway.

    I could stand to study it to the point where I felt comfortable with the topic and my understanding of it. I really don't. However, my priorities at the time lie in a different place.
    ISTP 6w5 sx/sp
    6-8-4/6-9-4 Tritype

  9. #69
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    Intresting would be the underlying psychological attitude behind this two things. To me for example its naturally to deem evolution as the better choice cause it makes more sense to me judged from a level of probability. I find it even ridicoulus to assume that a God had created me thats so not in tune with every sort of thinking I acquired over the years that I even under the stricest torture would still think its ridicoulus.

    From my point of few its even ridicoulus to think about the possibility that creationism was a real alternative and I know that in the place I live the thinking of mine is shared by many others. I wonder why that is so different. I'd call my thinking as being prone to realism, while I'd call american thinking as being prone to idealism. it's not that anyone is better, they both have their problematic sides, but even with an open mind and a reflective self I couldnt ever deem the possibility of Creationism to be true. Its gigantically far out for me
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

  10. #70
    Post Human Post Qlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by entropie View Post
    Intresting would be the underlying psychological attitude behind this two things. To me for example its naturally to deem evolution as the better choice cause it makes more sense to me judged from a level of probability. I find it even ridicoulus to assume that a God had created me thats so not in tune with every sort of thinking I acquired over the years that I even under the stricest torture would still think its ridicoulus.

    From my point of few its even ridicoulus to think about the possibility that creationism was a real alternative and I know that in the place I live the thinking of mine is shared by many others. I wonder why that is so different. I'd call my thinking as being prone to realism, while I'd call american thinking as being prone to idealism. it's not that anyone is better, they both have their problematic sides, but even with an open mind and a reflective self I couldnt ever deem the possibility of Creationism to be true. Its gigantically far out for me
    I don't mind talking about this subject till the cows come home, I don't really have a personal stake. But what I highlighted is basically what it boils down to. I'm not going to say the Christian Fundamentalists have a scientific case for creation, but they have a reason to believe it, and it doesn't really have anything to do with the science. So if you meet them on a logical and scientific basis, you're missing the point. From their point of view, and from their peer group, evolution is absolutely ridiculous.

    The reason I'm pointing this out, is because ultimately understanding is what is important to me. What I often see is athiests claim that religious viewpoints are stupid an nonsensical, which athiests can define for themselves, but for the same reasons that we exist from an evolutionary standpoint, religious beliefs are evidentally useful. The usefulness is what we need to know. And athiest often don't care any more than just get really angry at the subject and post a flame on the internet, than to understand why religion exists.

    My frustration extends also to Fundamentalists, but I get extra frustrated with athiests because they claim to be the more enlightened and rational of the lot.

Similar Threads

  1. Animistic vs Naturalistic Explanation
    By Skip Foreplay in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 12-20-2011, 10:08 PM
  2. MBTI vs the MBTI Step II test
    By Totenkindly in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 05-31-2008, 09:25 PM
  3. Faith vs Faithfulness
    By Totenkindly in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 11-01-2007, 07:10 AM
  4. Does SJ vs SP account for gender bias?
    By Tayshaun in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-17-2007, 08:11 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO