Our Ancestors are not Apes

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
“...They do however suggest to me that the standard naturalistic view of the universe is lacking something rather profound. ...”

I don't understand why you would think that.

war, famine , neighbours at each others throaghts.
Clearly the materialistic approach is not enough.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
“...They do however suggest to me that the standard naturalistic view of the universe is lacking something rather profound. ...”

I don't understand why you would think that.

You probably understand it all better than I do then. Good for you.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
war, famine , neighbours at each others throaghts.
Clearly the materialistic approach is not enough.

“...war, famine , neighbours at each others throaghts. ...”

what has that got to do with naturalistic view?

“...Clearly the materialistic approach is not enough....”


http://www.thefreedictionary.com/materialistic

“1. Philosophy The theory that physical matter is the only reality and that everything, including thought, feeling, mind, and will, can be explained in terms of matter and physical phenomena. “

if this is what you mean by “ the materialistic approach” then “ Clearly the materialistic approach is not enough” for what? How would such a “materialistic approach” be blamed (if that is what you are saying? ) for “.war, famine” etc when what causes war is hate, nationalism and sometimes religion but NOT this “materialistic approach” and what causes famine is lack of food and politics but NOT this “materialistic approach”? Simply having disbelief in the supernatural doesn't cause these things.

But if you mean by “ the materialistic approach” is the second definition:

“2. The theory or attitude that physical well-being and worldly possessions constitute the greatest good and highest value in life. “

then, again, what has that got to do with the “naturalistic view”?

The “naturalistic view” is simply the view that rejects all supernatural explanations; it says nothing about “ physical well-being and worldly possessions constitute the greatest good and highest value in life” and I for one am an example of somebody who has a “naturalistic view” but does NOT believe in obtaining the maximum in worldly possessions and there is no contradiction between these two things.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
“...war, famine , neighbours at each others throaghts. ...”

what has that got to do with naturalistic view?

“...Clearly the materialistic approach is not enough....”


http://www.thefreedictionary.com/materialistic

“1. Philosophy The theory that physical matter is the only reality and that everything, including thought, feeling, mind, and ning the maximum in worldly possessions and there is no contradiction between these two things.

Thnx for the clarification.
Clearly "materlialism" has caused much difference in the world.

Consider my case: I am a poor person living in a rich country. If I were in a third world country,I would be "rich".

Whats your take on the military budget for the U.S.? Do you think its justified?
Does spirituality have a part to play? 🙂

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Thnx for the clarification.
Clearly "materlialism" has caused much difference in the world.

Consider my case: I am a poor person living in a rich country. If I were in a third world country,I would be "rich".

Whats your take on the military budget for the U.S.? Do you think its justified?
Does spirituality have a part to play? 🙂

I still don't see what has that got to do with naturalistic view.

“....Whats your take on the military budget for the U.S.? Do you think its justified? ...”

No opinion; don't have enough knowledge about it no the related issues to form a rational opinion on this although, obviously, I want world peace.

“...Does spirituality have a part to play? 🙂...”

in what? In the military? If so, how? -Send solders in the front line waving the Bible crucifying the enemies or what?

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
I still don't see what has that got to do with naturalistic view.

“....Whats your take on the military budget for the U.S.? Do you think its justified? ...”

No opinion; don't have enough knowledge about it no the related issues to form a rational opinion on this although, obviously, I want world peace.

“...Does spirituality have a part to pl ...[text shortened]... ? If so, how? -Send solders in the front line waving the Bible crucifying the enemies or what?

Everything has to do with the naturalistic view as all things are connected.
We are all connected by prana for one. If there was no prana , you would die instantly-quicker than if you ran out of air!
Dont tell me you dont know the U.S. has a huge military budget and the advent of world peace that you (and I) desire would be greatly enhanced if people were fed and taught properly, before we spend even another cent on a killing machine?
Do you think people at a grass roots level could actually change the world that significantly, whether they use the crutch of religon or not. In this case the ends are all that matters, not so much the means. You know what I'm on about? I'm refferring to upcoming "Earth Changes" .
These changes will happen, our thoughts can change events to a degree, even if just on a physical level.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Everything has to do with the naturalistic view as all things are connected.
We are all connected by prana for one. If there was no prana , you would die instantly-quicker than if you ran out of air!
Dont tell me you dont know the U.S. has a huge military budget and the advent of world peace that you (and I) desire would be greatly enhanced if peopl ...[text shortened]... s will happen, our thoughts can change events to a degree, even if just on a physical level.

“...We are all connected by prana for one....”

what reason can you give in believing that there exists a 'pana'? Your apparent answer was;

“.... If there was no prana , you would die instantly-quicker than if you ran out of air! ...”

So, and correct me if I am wrong, I take it that the hypothesis is designed to justify itself by a circular argument that goes something like:

1, there exists a prana and, by definition of this 'prana', prana is essential for life.
2, therefore, from 1, without this existing prana, life would fail to continue to exist.
3, but life DOES continue to exists.
4, therefore, from 2, and 3, 1, must be true.

So there we have it; a prana must exist.
I could use the same circular logic type thus:

1, there exists a tooth fairy and, by definition of this 'tooth fairy', is essential for any gifts under pillows.
2, therefore, from 1, without this existing tooth fairy, no gifts will appear under pillows.
3, but there ARE some gifts appearing under pillows.
4, therefore, from 2, and 3, 1, must be true.

So there we have it; the tooth fairy must exist.

“...Dont tell me you dont know the U.S. has a huge military budget and the advent of world peace that you (and I) desire would be greatly enhanced if people were fed and taught properly, before we spend even another cent on a killing machine? ...”

I didn't say any of this. I just said I think I don't know enough about the issue to form a rational opinion on it ( implicitly, particularly regarding the amount that should be spent) , that is all.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
“...We are all connected by prana for one....”

what reason can you give in believing that there exists a 'pana'? Your apparent answer was;

“.... If there was no prana , you would die instantly-quicker than if you ran out of air! ...”

So, and correct me if I am wrong, I take it that the hypothesis is designed to justify itself by a circular a ...[text shortened]... it ( implicitly, particularly regarding the amount that should be spent) , that is all.

I was not trying to prove prana exists.
I dont care about trying to prove it.

Funny how you comment on plenty of things that are conjecture, but I cant use the fact that the U.S. has a huge military budget as a pivot for one of my points?