Posted: Apr 08, 2011 1:11 pm
by pfrankinstein
byofrcs wrote:
pfrankinstein wrote:
byofrcs wrote:We can use the same idea of attraction and repulsion at any scale including living organisms and societies/culture. The side-effects of the information that accumulates comes from how societies attract or repulse.

Here's a question/thought for you sir.

Envisage a single chain of 'cause and selected effect' from bang to you, should one judge the chain in the 'positive', as good.

We measure in the positive 'survival of the fittest; not ' the extinction of the weak'.

Where I live the ticks have just started to come out. From a practical human point of view I don't view ticks as "good". They are very well adapted to their environment though. This is the survival of the fit.

Obviously the entomologists on this forum would measure ticks as a positive. They probably love these little guys. I don't.

From rock to life and on into the minds of men goes selection. What we choose, our cognitive selected stance/opinion with regard to the God question is very important.

The continuation of positive chain, atheist, agnostic, Christian?



I view the god questions like I do discussions about the technology on Star Trek. Though I have all of Star Trek series on DVD and I'm happy to discuss the ideas I don't view this as "very important". It certainly has little relevance to our existence as it is a fictional series. I view gods in a similar way. I have bibles like I have Star Trek DVDs. It is fictional and remains so until shown otherwise.

As with ticks and other parasites I don't view it as a positive chain to Christians. Others may.

Well, i wasn't asking the 'tick' for their opinion, if the tick had the ability to reason and cherished their being here, then their answer would no doubt coincide with what should be the human perspective, assuming they loved the mortal experience.

A 'single chain' from bang to now a 'good' positive one?

If the name of the game is 'survival of the fittest' then the question again.

The continuation of that positive chain, should mankind/science move forward as 'atheist' 'agnostic' or 'christian'?

Good selection, isn't that what it is all about, making good selection. Myself i tend to see atheism as the "negative dead end" of our evolution. I'm agnostic myself, i tend to feel that where the positive meets the negative is the place where the lights come on.