Originally posted by twhitehead I think both words imply that said forces are conscious which is not the case. I would hardly call gravity discompassionate and unfeeling even though it is.
[b]Self preservation, competition (between races, gene pools), survival of the fittest. When does evolution show compassion or mercy. Nature is pretty damn ruthless and cold. It cares not for the i ...[text shortened]... g more. If thats what you are selling then don't be complaining.
So are you admitting that the Holy Spirit makes you decisions for you in a random manner? Or are you simply trying to avoid the issue as usual? WHITEY
What do you think? Of course you know that's not what I am admitting at all. I would quite happily spend many hours discussing the activity of the Holy Spirit with you and how he gives us meaningful choices in our lives.
Originally posted by twhitehead I think both words imply that said forces are conscious which is not the case. I would hardly call gravity discompassionate and unfeeling even though it is.
[b]Self preservation, competition (between races, gene pools), survival of the fittest. When does evolution show compassion or mercy. Nature is pretty damn ruthless and cold. It cares not for the i ...[text shortened]... g more. If thats what you are selling then don't be complaining.
I am just reflection your own claims and nothing more. If thats what you are selling then don't be complaining.Whitey
But you brought up the blame word not me. I have always talked about Gods love and forgiveness not blame. The representation of God is one you have in your own mind and you need to own it for yourself , but don't project it on to me. Please allow me to have my own beliefs.
Originally posted by knightmeister It's called ...erhem....evolutionary theory I think. Do you have an alternative theory for what is driving biological organisms...? Don't tell me you actually think your cat loves you and is not just attached to you as a primary giver of food.
As I said, you are just spouting utter nonsense. Evolutionary Theory makes no such claims. Please take some time to go and educate yourself before continuing this debate.
[edit]
Sorry that was a bit harsh.
By the way, do you believe that evolution is an accurate theory? You seem to imply that you do when it comes to animals.
Originally posted by knightmeister Now , the reason why I say that these things are natural desires is because that's what animals do at a basic level.
Not true. As I said you don't seem to have ever had a pet or you would know that it is not true.
They compete (often ruthlessly), they are subject to fight or flight on a regular basis, they don't show empathy or compassion, I have no doubt that many animals experience both empath and compassion and you have no good reason to think otherwise except clear ignorance on the subject.
and they act in ways that are tribal (driven by dawkins selfish gene no doubt). Many animals will even kill or eat their own kind or babies. So answer my question, would you like the world of human affairs to be dictated by evolutionary competition? And humans are no less prone to such behavior. However our behavior and animals behavior is much more complex than you pretend.
To answer you question: No, I would not like the world of human affairs to be dictated by evolutionary competition, nor do I think it is, nor do I claim it is, nor do I think it has any relevance to the discussion about free will.
Originally posted by knightmeister But you brought up the blame word not me. I have always talked about Gods love and forgiveness not blame. The representation of God is one you have in your own mind and you need to own it for yourself , but don't project it on to me. Please allow me to have my own beliefs.
I never said God was blaming you, I said 'taking the blame'. It was you that brought up responsibility for actions and claimed that your view of free will was the only one in which responsibility was possible (though you have omited to explain why).
Originally posted by knightmeister What do you think? Of course you know that's not what I am admitting at all. I would quite happily spend many hours discussing the activity of the Holy Spirit with you and how he gives us meaningful choices in our lives.
Except that whenever you are asked about it you resort to "I don't actually understand it."
Originally posted by twhitehead Except that whenever you are asked about it you resort to "I don't actually understand it."
No it means that I don't FULLY understand it, there's plenty I do understand. The problem with skeptical atheism is that unless a christian can say that absolutely ALL the t's are crossed they switch off . You are only interested in things that can be fully encompassed by rational thought , anything that falls slightly outside is dismissed.
Anyway all this is by the by . The only thing to say is 'try me'.
Originally posted by twhitehead Accurate but misleading. So say something is unfeeling caries an implication that it is sentient.
I agree but you said gravity was unfeeling not me. Technically forces of nature cannot be described as cruel or unfeeling but I think they can be described as without feeling or empathy because essentailly they are.
Originally posted by twhitehead I never said God was blaming you, I said 'taking the blame'. It was you that brought up responsibility for actions and claimed that your view of free will was the only one in which responsibility was possible (though you have omited to explain why).
claimed that your view of free will was the only one in which responsibility was possible (though you have omited to explain why).WHITEY
I have infact explained why many times. How am I to be held responsible for my actions if what I do is inevitable?. You might as well put a worm in court for eating some beetle. You would not argue that the worm "knew better" or "could have chosen otherwise" and yet suddenly with humans we seem to think this kind of judgement neccessary? How can I be judged for what I do if I have no alternatives available to me?
Originally posted by twhitehead Not true. As I said you don't seem to have ever had a pet or you would know that it is not true.
[b]They compete (often ruthlessly), they are subject to fight or flight on a regular basis, they don't show empathy or compassion, I have no doubt that many animals experience both empath and compassion and you have no good reason to think otherwise ex ...[text shortened]... , nor do I claim it is, nor do I think it has any relevance to the discussion about free will.[/b]
They compete (often ruthlessly), they are subject to fight or flight on a regular basis, they don't show empathy or compassion, KM
I have no doubt that many animals experience both empath and compassion and you have no good reason to think otherwise except clear ignorance on the subject. WHITEY
RESPONSE--
You should know that the onus is on you to show that this is true not me. The burden of proof is on you since I have no good reason to think that animals empathise or show compassion. I could easily argue that a worm has free will and you have "no good reason to think otherwise". You are getting sloppy.
On top of this it appears that you do have a woozy , sentimental view of nature afterall. Ahhh....how quaint (sorry couldn't resist)
Originally posted by knightmeister How am I to be held responsible for my actions if what I do is inevitable?. You might as well put a worm in court for eating some beetle. You would not argue that the worm "knew better" or "could have chosen otherwise" and yet suddenly with humans we seem to think this kind of judgement neccessary? How can I be judged for what I do if I have no alternatives available to me?
What does it mean to be 'responsible for your actions?
What does it mean to 'be judged' for what you do?
Without answers to these your explanation is meaningless.
Originally posted by twhitehead As I said, you are just spouting utter nonsense. Evolutionary Theory makes no such claims. Please take some time to go and educate yourself before continuing this debate.
[edit]
Sorry that was a bit harsh.
By the way, do you believe that evolution is an accurate theory? You seem to imply that you do when it comes to animals.
Sorry that was a bit harsh.
By the way, do you believe that evolution is an accurate theory? You seem to imply that you do when it comes to animals.WHITEY
No offence taken. It was a touch harsh. Evolution is of course an accurate theory , why would I think otherwise? Surely you don't think I'm one of those creationists with an unexamined faith?
I've read 2-3 dawkins books and other stuff on evolution and it all points to evolution being essentially competitive and quite ruthless in discarding life's losers.
Originally posted by twhitehead Not true. As I said you don't seem to have ever had a pet or you would know that it is not true.
[b]They compete (often ruthlessly), they are subject to fight or flight on a regular basis, they don't show empathy or compassion, I have no doubt that many animals experience both empath and compassion and you have no good reason to think otherwise ex ...[text shortened]... , nor do I claim it is, nor do I think it has any relevance to the discussion about free will.[/b]
And humans are no less prone to such behavior WHITEY
Yes they are , they have a conscience which hints at different alternative behaviours that might be taken. How many animals wrestle with their conscience?
Originally posted by knightmeister You should know that the onus is on you to show that this is true not me. The burden of proof is on you since I have no good reason to think that animals empathise or show compassion.
Actually the onus is on you, as you wish to use a totally unfounded 'fact' as the basis for your argument.
The problem is that most animals do not communicate with humans to a degree that would make it easy to prove that they are empathizing. However their behavior suggests that they do.
The word empathy it seems has a fairly broad meaning, but there is no doubt that when a cat looks at you, it sees you as a conscious being and does not imagine that you are an inanimate object. Just the fact that it attempts to communicate with you and with other cats shows this.
Door 20 (a vision of christian free will)
18 Jun '07 09:58
Back to Top