Quote:
Thaiturkey, I did enjoy reading your dissertation. Interesting perspective. I hope you do not mind but I am going to use your statement to make a point..
Yes a rock is different than a rabbit, but I am not sure what is meant by "big difference".
Personally, I am NOT so sure we as a species are in the position to make that statement, if a "big difference" somehow insinuates superiority, better, or more advanced. Do we really understand the mechanics of it all? ...... This is a bit abstract, but I feel making that claim is down the same path of thinking that evangelism stems from. (Feeling like things like "us" are some better, right or more advanced. So in the case of religion, evangelism or missionaries the goal is to help and make others think and act as you do. "save them" make them like "us")
It is my opinion that our learned or genetic tendency as a species to classify and separate objects and creatures based on how much they are like us is a major flaw in our species. Think about how we think... Multi cell creatures like us are more "advanced than amoebas". Mammals some how more advanced than egg layers. Even we create hierarchy based on behaviors of creatures. Ones that have traits like us some how gain favor and are considered superior, smarter, better. In my opinion this is the line of thinking that drives religion and also the root of genocides, racism, prejudice, shovanistic behavior and on and on.
ON
Hi ON.
I was not suggesting that a living being is superior to a rock but stating that it is different. Read that sentence in conjunction with the previous one where I mentioned the 'spark of life'. That's the difference that I meant. One might argue that rocks are superior to humans because, for example, they don't start wars but that was not my point either. In fact, when I stand amongst mountains and think about the millions of years during which they were formed, I struggle think that my puny life is superior to them.
I was trying to say that although we might have a grasp of how the universe was out together we, or I at least, cannot fathom how life became a part of that. What was it that turned collections of inanimate elements into living beings? That was my point. Religions and individual sets of beliefs attempt to explain it but, in my view, none of them do it successfully.
I went on to suggest that it probably doesn't matter because we have enough to do in our lives, spiritually if you like, without pondering what is impossible to explain with certainty.
Thaiturkey, I did enjoy reading your dissertation. Interesting perspective. I hope you do not mind but I am going to use your statement to make a point..
Yes a rock is different than a rabbit, but I am not sure what is meant by "big difference".
Personally, I am NOT so sure we as a species are in the position to make that statement, if a "big difference" somehow insinuates superiority, better, or more advanced. Do we really understand the mechanics of it all? ...... This is a bit abstract, but I feel making that claim is down the same path of thinking that evangelism stems from. (Feeling like things like "us" are some better, right or more advanced. So in the case of religion, evangelism or missionaries the goal is to help and make others think and act as you do. "save them" make them like "us")
It is my opinion that our learned or genetic tendency as a species to classify and separate objects and creatures based on how much they are like us is a major flaw in our species. Think about how we think... Multi cell creatures like us are more "advanced than amoebas". Mammals some how more advanced than egg layers. Even we create hierarchy based on behaviors of creatures. Ones that have traits like us some how gain favor and are considered superior, smarter, better. In my opinion this is the line of thinking that drives religion and also the root of genocides, racism, prejudice, shovanistic behavior and on and on.
ON
Hi ON.
I was not suggesting that a living being is superior to a rock but stating that it is different. Read that sentence in conjunction with the previous one where I mentioned the 'spark of life'. That's the difference that I meant. One might argue that rocks are superior to humans because, for example, they don't start wars but that was not my point either. In fact, when I stand amongst mountains and think about the millions of years during which they were formed, I struggle think that my puny life is superior to them.
I was trying to say that although we might have a grasp of how the universe was out together we, or I at least, cannot fathom how life became a part of that. What was it that turned collections of inanimate elements into living beings? That was my point. Religions and individual sets of beliefs attempt to explain it but, in my view, none of them do it successfully.
I went on to suggest that it probably doesn't matter because we have enough to do in our lives, spiritually if you like, without pondering what is impossible to explain with certainty.
