OK. Let's just say, for the sake of discussion, that once upon a time trillions of years ago, aside from picturing God creating matter, all physical matter was concentrated in one area and due to the forces and nature of that matter it exploded and the result was what presently exists.
Now I realise I could have worded it differently, but I'm leading into what it is I really want to get at.
Somewhere in the past, and it makes no difference when, certain elements collided and congealed into that which we call living things.
How am I doing so far?
Anyway, this is what puzzles me. If life came from matter or energy, now remember I'm talking about living things and not merely things made of the substance of matter such as rock or light, did not the organising (evolution) of those elements need to follow some kind of harmonising structuring program in order to successfully generate life?
That's my first question.
If so, then why would it not BE that all living things evolve in a balanced and harmonious way?
I ask that in light of the idea, in my view, living things, especially mammals, are not in harmony, but are in fact in a state of upheaval.
Do you see what I'm driving at? How can evolution occur if it does not do so in a harmonious way?
It seems to me that once some kind of conflict between evolving elements begins to occur it would negate that process for one that builds upon the balance between opposing forces.
It seems only logical to me. Is what I mean clear?
1 edit
Originally posted by josephwFor one, can you define "harmonising structuring program"? I googled it and got zero hits.
OK. Let's just say, for the sake of discussion, that once upon a time trillions of years ago, aside from picturing God creating matter, all physical matter was concentrated in one area and due to the forces and nature of that matter it exploded and the result was what presently exists.
Now I realise I could have worded it differently, but I'm leading int the balance between opposing forces.
It seems only logical to me. Is what I mean clear?
If so, then why would it not BE that all living things evolve in a balanced and harmonious way?...How can evolution occur if it does not do so in a harmonious way?
Why is your expectation that it would? Seems to me that for life to survive it only need have an environment that is not so inhospitable so as to not sustain an ongoing population.
Originally posted by josephwNo it's not clear.
OK. Let's just say, for the sake of discussion, that once upon a time trillions of years ago, aside from picturing God creating matter, all physical matter was concentrated in one area and due to the forces and nature of that matter it exploded and the result was what presently exists.
Now I realise I could have worded it differently, but I'm leading int ...[text shortened]... the balance between opposing forces.
It seems only logical to me. Is what I mean clear?
What do you mean by all mammals being a state of upheaval?
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne"For one, can you define "harmonising structuring program"? I googled it and got zero hits."
For one, can you define "harmonising structuring program"? I googled it and got zero hits.
[b]If so, then why would it not BE that all living things evolve in a balanced and harmonious way?...How can evolution occur if it does not do so in a harmonious way?
Why is your expectation that it would? Seems to me that for life to survive it only need have an environment that is not so inhospitable so as to not sustain an ongoing population.[/b]
I made it up.
"Seems to me that for life to survive it only need have an environment that is not so inhospitable so as to not sustain an ongoing population."
Like the one we're creating for ourselves?
I think you missed my meaning.
1 edit
Originally posted by josephwI made it up.
[b]"For one, can you define "harmonising structuring program"? I googled it and got zero hits."
I made it up.
"Seems to me that for life to survive it only need have an environment that is not so inhospitable so as to not sustain an ongoing population."
Like the one we're creating for ourselves?
I think you missed my meaning.[/b]
I suspected as much, so don't you think you should define it so that people can understand what you meant by it?
I think you missed my meaning.
Then why don't you explain your meaning?
Based on the responses thus far, what is clear is that what you meant is decidedly unclear. So why don't you clarify instead of giving useless responses?
Originally posted by amannionEvolution began somewhere in time.
No it's not clear.
What do you mean by all mammals being a state of upheaval?
At it's beginning the elements for life began to organise.
The conditions for the organisation of those elements into life had to be, logically speaking in my opinion, exact. You may not agree.
Why, then, is nature in a state of violent upheaval?
What I'm attempting to do is to juxtapose two concepts. The one being, that the idea of evolution, for me at least, carries with it the idea that life should be in a state of harmonious balance, and the other is that life just isn't that way.
I can't reconcile evolution as the harmonious, peaceful, balanced building of life forms with the conflict that exists in nature, and especially between man and man.
Originally posted by josephwWhat exactly do you mean by life being a state of violent upheaval?
Evolution began somewhere in time.
At it's beginning the elements for life began to organise.
The conditions for the organisation of those elements into life had to be, logically speaking in my opinion, exact. You may not agree.
Why, then, is nature in a state of violent upheaval?
What I'm attempting to do is to juxtapose two concepts. The one being, ...[text shortened]... g of life forms with the conflict that exists in nature, and especially between man and man.
As for evolution being harmonious, peaceful, and balanced, what makes you think that's how it works?
- Joined
- 02 Feb 06
- Moves
- 123634
Originally posted by josephwI believe that the fact that life is not always harmonious and is full of upheaval and threats to survival is the reason evolution takes place. If everything were nice, neat, safe, and harmonious there would be no need for life to evolve. Life evolves to survive and thrive and yes even at the expense of others at times.
Evolution began somewhere in time.
At it's beginning the elements for life began to organise.
The conditions for the organisation of those elements into life had to be, logically speaking in my opinion, exact. You may not agree.
Why, then, is nature in a state of violent upheaval?
What I'm attempting to do is to juxtapose two concepts. The one being, ...[text shortened]... g of life forms with the conflict that exists in nature, and especially between man and man.
Necessity is the mother of invention. I would also say that perhaps necessity is the mother of evolution.
Originally posted by josephwGod made ( and is still making) order out of chaos
OK. Let's just say, for the sake of discussion, that once upon a time trillions of years ago, aside from picturing God creating matter, all physical matter was concentrated in one area and due to the forces and nature of that matter it exploded and the result was what presently exists.
Now I realise I could have worded it differently, but I'm leading int ...[text shortened]... the balance between opposing forces.
It seems only logical to me. Is what I mean clear?
