- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Anthropologists, at what point do you believe we became sentient?
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:23 pm to Fun Bunch
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:23 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
Do you have any real evidence to support this?
If God didn’t create the universe and everything in it, then the cosmos are simply the product of physics, chemistry, space, time and matter. What evidence do you have that these features and forces can produce the consciousness or free-agency we experience? What evidence is there that physics and chemistry can produce the high-level information we find in DNA? What evidence do we have that these forces can account for the appearance of fine-tuning in the universe or the appearance of design in biological structures? If evidence is important to you, how can you accept naturalistic explanations for these features of the universe when there isn’t sufficient evidence to support such claims
This post was edited on 5/11/20 at 1:25 pm
1
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:23 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:??
Instead of saying "consciousness" I said how does one "justify" what's right and wrong using reason.
Which is to basically say "consciousness."
quote:You've got that backwards. Laws against murder exist because we realized it was detrimental, not the other way around.
Because laws against it exists.
quote:It's always the same with christians. Everything that is hard to think about is due to god.
Laws that are based on a universal lawgiver. Things are wrong because God determined that they are. There is no other basis from which to argue.
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:24 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:Why would this matter? I willingly admit that there are many societies that have developed wholly apart from the Judaeo-Christian framework.
There is not one standard definition of morality.
quote:Some laws have changed, but a few (the important ones) have not. Those are of the universal variety.
All one has to do is look at the Bible to see how morality has changed drastically over time, from the Old Testament to the New to now.
quote:True morality, one's ability to deem something "right" or "wrong" exists outside of social constructs.
Morality is a human construct based on the minds of the community overall. It shifts and changes over time.
As you know, a tiger killing another tiger is not murder.
But a human killing another human is. It's wrong, and it can't be considered "wrong" on any materialists basis. One must plea to the immaterial, the universal law that was created by an immutable God. So, every time that you call something "wrong" or teach your kids that something is "wrong" you are borrowing from a Christian worldview. You are living and acting as if God exists.
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:25 pm to Salmon
quote:Are you referring to aspects of the Mosaic law that no longer apply? I'm sorry, that's an "in house" discussion. You wouldn't buy any of it.
why does God constantly change his laws?
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:26 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:Give me one.
Science is filled with Laws.
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:28 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
Because laws against it exists. Laws that are based on a universal lawgiver. Things are wrong because God determined that they are. There is no other basis from which to argue.
Or laws, and right or wrong exist because humans created(evolved) them over a few hundreds of thousands of years as a beneficial way to further the species. Consider a band of hunter-gatherers: They can all murder each other, but the group is then weaker. The group is stronger and more likely to survive if they peacefully coexist and support each other. If they reason this and live accordingly, then they are abiding by a moral code: morality. The rational basis is self-preservation.
This post was edited on 5/11/20 at 1:29 pm
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:28 pm to lsut2005
quote:
If God didn’t create the universe and everything in it, then the cosmos are simply the product of physics, chemistry, space, time and matter. What evidence do you have that these features and forces can produce the consciousness or free-agency we experience? What evidence is there that physics and chemistry can produce the high-level information we find in DNA? What evidence do we have that these forces can account for the appearance of fine-tuning in the universe or the appearance of design in biological structures? If evidence is important to you, how can you accept naturalistic explanations for these features of the universe when there isn’t sufficient evidence to support such claims
Sigh. You quite simply, as your type normally does, evaded the question.
You simply turned around, started your hypothesis with God, and then said "What evidence do you have?"
Let's assume I have none whatsoever.
What tangible evidence do you have, that can be tested and peer reviewed?
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:29 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:How do you predate the first cause?
Societies predating "God" had morality.
quote:
Things are wrong because God determined that they are.
quote:My entire argument going back to page 6 or 7.
Do you have any real evidence to support this?
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:33 pm to Korkstand
quote:
Instead of saying "consciousness" I said how does one "justify" what's right and wrong using reason.
Which is to basically say "consciousness."
??
What's confusing. The ability to determine "right" from "wrong" is by definition consciousness. I talked about how we must have God to determine or justify or thoughts about what is "right" and "wrong", therefore I was appealing to consciousness the whole time without using the word.
quote:Cannot be proven.
Because laws against it exists.
You've got that backwards. Laws against murder exist because we realized it was detrimental, not the other way around.
quote:I've given laid out my thinking by arguing that the laws of logic cannot exist apart from God. Just because what I wrote seems simple doesn't mean it is unsophisticated or incorrect. Quite the opposite.
It's always the same with christians. Everything that is hard to think about is due to god.
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:34 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
How do you predate the first cause?
Societies existed before anyone had the concept of the judeo-christian God, and existed before they had heard of the Judeo-Christian God, yet they still developed morality.
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:34 pm to Celery
I shouldn't have been so vague... I'm talking about the laws of the universe.
law of gravity, etc....
Our universe is spectacularly fine-tuned for life. By this I mean only that it looks as if small changes in this universe’s basic features would have made life’s evolution impossible.” The foundational “laws of nature” are amazingly fine-tuned; there is very little room for alteration. The smallest modifications of these laws would completely destroy the possibility of life in the universe.
Who created those laws?
One thing is certain: whatever caused the cosmos must be something other than space, time or matter (since these didn’t exist prior to the beginning of the universe). That means we’re looking for something non-spatial, non-temporal, non-material, and incredibly powerful. Sounds a lot like God, doesn’t it?
law of gravity, etc....
Our universe is spectacularly fine-tuned for life. By this I mean only that it looks as if small changes in this universe’s basic features would have made life’s evolution impossible.” The foundational “laws of nature” are amazingly fine-tuned; there is very little room for alteration. The smallest modifications of these laws would completely destroy the possibility of life in the universe.
Who created those laws?
One thing is certain: whatever caused the cosmos must be something other than space, time or matter (since these didn’t exist prior to the beginning of the universe). That means we’re looking for something non-spatial, non-temporal, non-material, and incredibly powerful. Sounds a lot like God, doesn’t it?
This post was edited on 5/11/20 at 1:38 pm
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:35 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:That would not be a solution or an answer, but a theory until proven further.
What tangible evidence do you have, that can be tested and peer reviewed?
Science simply cannot provide answers for the meaning of life. There is no meaning to life according to Science.
So go steal a car and cheat on your wife in said car because science says that's "ok".
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:37 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
Give me one.
Are...you joking?
Thermodynamics? Cosmic Expansion? Planetary Motion?
There are many many scientific Laws.
Theories such as Gravity and Evolution are also considered "Fact".
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:43 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:If that were true it wouldn't matter.
Societies existed before anyone had the concept of the judeo-christian God, and existed before they had heard of the Judeo-Christian God, yet they still developed morality.
You're assuming God doesn't exist
and you're unwilling to grant that he might. And if he does, then universal laws or a conscience need not be proven.
You see, I do not need to justify "right" or "wrong." I can gladly say we know it where animals do not because it fits in my worldview.
These thing do not fit in your materialistic worldview, therefore the burden of proof is on you.
While you are attempting to justify your every thought and action apart from the reality in which they are based, I'm sitting here being very much consistent with the correct worldview.
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:46 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
Theories such as Gravity and Evolution are also considered "Fact".
Well, you've done messed up.
Science makes NO guarantee that things will continue on as they have been. By definition, that is NOT a law.
Now if you want to say that they are laws you are more than welcomed to do so, but you can't do that unless you want to acknowledge that an unchanging God exists or you could simply borrow knowledge from the correct worldview (the non material one).
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:47 pm to lsut2005
quote:
I shouldn't have been so vague... I'm talking about the laws of the universe. law of gravity, etc.... Our universe is spectacularly fine-tuned for life. By this I mean only that it looks as if small changes in this universe’s basic features would have made life’s evolution impossible.” The foundational “laws of nature” are amazingly fine-tuned; there is very little room for alteration. The smallest modifications of these laws would completely destroy the possibility of life in the universe. Who created those laws? One thing is certain: whatever caused the cosmos must be something other than space, time or matter (since these didn’t exist prior to the beginning of the universe). That means we’re looking for something non-spatial, non-temporal, non-material, and incredibly powerful. Sounds a lot like God, doesn’t it?
Thanks for clarifying
Sure, I get that. I’m mostly in agreement, which is why I tend to believe in some form of intelligent creation. I don’t know how to label that, whether it’s God, gods, a “divine” computer computer programmer, or just any form of intelligent being, but I have no problem with intelligent design. I also, have no problem with random design and I wouldn’t declare with authority that either side is right or wrong. They all seem equally probable and equally improbable from my limited point of view. My brain is too small and my logic is too falable to fully comprehend anything to a point of absolute assurance.
This post was edited on 5/11/20 at 1:50 pm
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:47 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
and you're unwilling to grant that he might.
I have never said this in the slightest.
God may very well exist. That concept doesn't matter to my arguments whatsoever.
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:48 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
Well, you've done messed up.
Science makes NO guarantee that things will continue on as they have been. By definition, that is NOT a law.
Now if you want to say that they are laws you are more than welcomed to do so, but you can't do that unless you want to acknowledge that an unchanging God exists or you could simply borrow knowledge from the correct worldview (the non material one).
I think you are have fundamental misconception about what "Laws" and "Theories" are in the scientific sense.
hint: A Theory can never become a Law. But it can still be an absolute fact.
This post was edited on 5/11/20 at 1:49 pm
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:48 pm to Celery
Awesome, we can definitely agree on that!
Posted on 5/11/20 at 1:50 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:It's confusing because you are conflating things.
What's confusing.
quote:No, that is not the definition. That ability is but one of many granted by consciousness.
The ability to determine "right" from "wrong" is by definition consciousness.
quote:Then use words that mean what you want to say.
I was appealing to consciousness the whole time without using the word.
quote:
Cannot be proven.
Says the guy who thinks the existence of god is proven? Not only that, but your "proof" of this is due to a lack of proof of something else. "This is not proven, therefore my alternative idea is proven". Absurd.
Page 10 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News