Do you believe in God?

[dxld]

Though I could give someone a gift card, only to have them go out and buy a Miley Cyrus album. Surely that wouldn't be fair to have that reflect on me?

The whole riches from God thing is rubbish of course, and should be considered so by both believers and non-believers.



The God you describe is not fair and just then. Just so you know.

Who should inherit the throne, the eldest son or the son who loves the King?

 

[niky]

The fittest to rule.

Or, failing that, a democratically elected leader would be nice.

 

[dxld]

The fittest to rule.

Or, failing that, a democratically elected leader would be nice.

I don't totally agree with democracy because democratic mob rule was a reason Christ was crucified.

But who will inherit the family home? Will the sons and daughters vote or will the mother/father decide?

 

[niky]

I don't totally agree with democracy because democratic mob rule was a reason Christ was crucified.

But who will inherit the family home? Will the sons and daughters vote or will the mother/father decide?

Mob rule didn't elect the King (who also sentenced John the Baptist) and religious leaders who sent Jesus to his death.

-

Inheritance suggests, first and foremost, that we are given ownership of the planet. And that second: there is a mother/father to decide the inheritance of the Earth.

A point that is moot. If the final fate of all is to ascend to heaven, who actually cares about inheritance? And if heaven is supposedly a place of eternal bliss, how can one eternal bliss be greater than another?

 

[Dodzzz]

well, I don't believe that creatures as complex and advanced like Humans and other animals don't have a creator, or creators.

look at how humans created robots, through thousands of years of learning process, processing raw materials until humans can create metals, then electricity, then computers, then finally we are able to create (lame) robots. robots do not exists just like BAM! it's there ********. and so does every living creatures in this planet, it has its own creator and designers.

and if we can receive signals from robots (low battery alarm, or error codes, etc) then I believe "GOD" can also hear our prayers and He will do something about it.

I believe in God, using logic and science, not using mythical stories or anything.

 

[niky]

Robots can't reproduce. And they don't contain nerves and blood vessels that loop around like spaghetti because they evolved organically instead of being designed right, in the first place.

 

[Danny]

Robots can't reproduce.

What about a 3D printer that can make smaller 3D printers that are able to themselves create smaller 3D printers?

 

[Scaff]

I don't totally agree with democracy because democratic mob rule was a reason Christ was crucified.

You clearly don't understand the meaning of the word democratic if this is how you are attempting to use it.

Oh and any chance of you actually answering the numerous questions that have been asked and you have ignored, or will you simply continue the trend of ignoring questions that you don't want to address?

well, I don't believe that creatures as complex and advanced like Humans and other animals don't have a creator, or creators.

look at how humans created robots, through thousands of years of learning process, processing raw materials until humans can create metals, then electricity, then computers, then finally we are able to create (lame) robots. robots do not exists just like BAM! it's there ********. and so does every living creatures in this planet, it has its own creator and designers.

No living creature on the planet just 'bam' and came into existence either, as such the issue here would be a fundamental misunderstanding of the evolutionary process, that however is a discussion for another thread.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/creation-vs-evolution.51448/page-287#post-9152574

 

[niky]

What about a 3D printer that can make smaller 3D printers that are able to themselves create smaller 3D printers?

Put me down for two.

 

[Dodzzz]

Robots can't reproduce. And they don't contain nerves and blood vessels that loop around like spaghetti because they evolved organically instead of being designed right, in the first place.

Robots can reproduce in the future, how hard is it to program a robot to collect materials from the mountains, process it, make factories, then manufacture it using the design we programmed it into? (similar to robots for creating parts of a car) it sounds complicated now, but I'm sure it is possible in the future..

And they don't contain nerves and blood because we (humans) have not fully understand how it works yet.. I'm also pretty sure humans can create organic robots just like us in the very far future... (and I also believe we are just robots like that too.. ) now this is getting sad & scary ...

@Scafff
I'm sorry if I'm discussing this in the wrong thread... >.<

 

[DQuaN]

And they don't contain nerves and blood because we (humans) have not fully understand how it works yet.

We haven't?

Makes my Biology A'level redundant then I guess.

 

[Hun200kmh]

We haven't?

Makes my Biology A'level redundant then I guess.

Not redundant, just far from Dr. Frankenstein's level. Yet (or Still, I never know what's the right word to use)

 

[TheCracker]

well, I don't believe that creatures as complex and advanced like Humans and other animals don't have a creator, or creators.

look at how humans created robots, through thousands of years of learning process, processing raw materials until humans can create metals, then electricity, then computers, then finally we are able to create (lame) robots. robots do not exists just like BAM! it's there ********. and so does every living creatures in this planet, it has its own creator and designers.

Inanimate natural objects such as coal or gemstones or mountains didn't 'exist just like BAM!' either, but they're not a sign of the existence of a designer or creator. They didn't evolve in same way we attribute to 'nature' but they have been 'created' over the passage of time from a different starting form.

Things can change from one form to another without any 'intelligent' influence. Humans are no different in this regard.

 

[Mark T]

God gave the Arabs wealth and land, they share the same blood of Abraham that the Jews share, but that does not mean they get to enter heaven.

What the Jews and Arabs fail to understand is that they are technically brother/sister, and as myself being a Christian with no Jewish or Arab Blood, it saddens me that they fight.

First of all, God not give anyone any land and none of it is holy. The sooner religious people and organisations understand this the sooner we can move on and start sharing the land in a fair way.

Second, all humans are related. We share a common ancestor. Talking about "blood" when dealing with religion creates a divide. No one's blood is any more special or holy than anyone else's.

 

[zzz_pt]

What about a 3D printer that can make smaller 3D printers that are able to themselves create smaller 3D printers?

Machines don't have self-consciousness. They don't know how to make a joke or to use irony. They don't worry about or neither they feel happy when other machines are happy.
And I think they will never do that. We can't re-create anything similar to our consciousness, beacuse it's not a phisycal object/thing constituted by atoms.

 

[Scaff]

Machines don't have self-consciousness. They don't know how to make a joke or to use irony. They don't worry about or neither they feel happy when other machines are happy.
And I think they will never do that. We can't re-create anything similar to our consciousness, beacuse it's not a phisycal object/thing constituted by atoms.

And?

 

[zzz_pt]

Much like animals or any other live organism that we know. If we are no diferent from any other live-form in terms of matter, why are we the only one that can deliberate think/hate/care/ about our peers? Science / Psycology or neuroscience don't have a clue on this simples question. We know that our brain process information and for each emotion/feeling/state of humor corresponds some chemical process or some electric impulses. But is that it? If so, why does our brain do such things and not every other brain if the origin, the matter and the way they funcion is the same?

How do we know what is good or bad. What is moral right or wrong? Is chance the answer? Or evolution? Who said what is morally right or morally wrong for we to belive in or for we to accept it? If is something that came from us alone, how is that even possible?

I'm just sharing some doubts/questions.

ps: I'm not saying evolution did not happend. It's pretty obvious it did.

 

[Scaff]

Much like animals or any other live organism that we know. If we are no diferent from any other live-form in terms of matter, why are we the only one that can deliberate think/hate/care/ about our peers? Science / Psycology or neuroscience don't have a clue on this simples question. We know that our brain process information and for each emotion/feeling/state of humor corresponds some chemical process or some electric impulses. But is that it? If so, why does our brain do such things and not every other brain if the origin, the matter and the way they funcion is the same?

I'm just sharing some doubts/questions.

Its a perfectly valid area of questioning, however from your original posts it would appear that you are suggesting that simply because certainly animals on the planet have a consciousness and are self-aware that it means that a god(s) were responsible for them existing.

That quite frankly is lazy reasoning and is based on zero evidence.

As for why we feel/care, etc. Well it actually helps to ensure a social groups survival, something that has been illustrated far outside humans, as such its totally incorrect to claim that we 'have no clue' as to why it exists. Rather its becoming well understood as to why its a benefit to species and fits perfectly well with evolutionary theory.

 

[Denur]

Much like animals or any other live organism that we know. If we are no diferent from any other live-form in terms of matter, why are we the only one that can deliberate think/hate/care/ about our peers? Science / Psycology or neuroscience don't have a clue on this simples question.

We actually know quite a bit about animal emotions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotion_in_animals

 

[zzz_pt]

Lazy reasoning is quite different. When science or reasone fails to give answers is when faith enters. Our lives are not only about science. Science is a branch of our lives. History, Philosophy, Religion are others. Any of these 3 claims anything only upon evidences. Saying that someone is lazy just to say or belive in somthing that science can't prove is not the right thing to do.

On your last paragraph, I don't have such sure.

 

[zzz_pt]

We actually know quite a bit about animal emotions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotion_in_animals

That was not my point. I was reffering to self-consciousness and fellings and emotions ABOUT another person/thing/animal. Animals do not think or ask about. (From what I read in this wiki kink, is not sicentificly right to say that animals have emotions. Not any proves yet)

I know that idea from Darwin of animals having emotions. And we all know or see that with our dogs or cats or wharever. We can see when they are "happy" or "dpressed".

But I'm not a specialist and I'm aware of my limits. I just have my opinion and I'm sharing it.

 

[TheCracker]

That was not my point. I was reffering to self-consciousness and fellings and emotions ABOUT another person/thing/animal. Animals do not think or ask about.

Other animals look after or protect weaker individuals within their social group. Why would they do this if they had no emotional connection to that individual? This point goes beyond Darwin's survival of the fittest.

 

[Exorcet]

We can't re-create anything similar to our consciousness, beacuse it's not a phisycal object/thing constituted by atoms.

Consciousness isn't physical, but the brain that produces it is. Conscious machines could very well exist at some point.

If we are no diferent from any other live-form in terms of matter

We are different. Everything is different from everything else. We just happen to be the species with the most advanced brain.

why are we the only one that can deliberate think/hate/care/ about our peers? Science / Psycology or neuroscience don't have a clue on this simples question.

The clues are biology and evolution.

 

[Scaff]

That was not my point. I was reffering to self-consciousness and fellings and emotions ABOUT another person/thing/animal. Animals do not think or ask about. (From what I read in this wiki kink, is not sicentificly right to say that animals have emotions. Not any proves yet)

I know that idea from Darwin of animals having emotions. And we all know or see that with our dogs or cats or wharever. We can see when they are "happy" or "dpressed".

But I'm not a specialist and I'm aware of my limits. I just have my opinion and I'm sharing it.

Except they do.

Animals from numerous species have been shown to be empathic (placing oneself in another position)....

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...rats-free-known-trapped-rats-being-restrained

....as such your opinion on this is quite incorrect.

 

[zzz_pt]

Other animals look after or protect weaker individuals within their social group. Why would they do this if they had no emotional connection to that individual? This point goes beyond Darwin's survival of the fittest.

They do that for its spiecies to thrive. Not because they care. It's the same with us in an elementary level (the base of Maslow piramid).

We are tho only spiecies aware of our finite lifes. Cats or dogs doesn't know they gonna die.

@Exorcet
1. Do you claim that our brain produces our consciousness? Prove it. That is quite a claim.
2. We are not. We all are composed by the same basic elements in the universe (carbon, hidogen...).
3. Not. It's yet to be proven that any other life form apart from us can think ou care about others. And by think, I'm not saying know that it exists, but knowing which is its favourite color or what it thinks about death.

 

[Exorcet]

They do that for its spiecies to thrive. Not because they care. It's the same with us in an elementary level (the base of Maslow piramid).

They don't do it with the idea that their species will thrive, they don't know about evolution. Evolution made the trait prevalent because it allowed them to thrive, but from their point of view, they may feel like us.

1. Do you claim that our brain produces our consciousness? Prove it. That is quite a claim.

They are certainly linked. Cut off one of the sensory organs from the brain and you lose any conscious information from that organ.

2. We are not. We all are composed by the same basic elements in the universe (carbon, hidogen...).

Yes, similar materials in different amounts and arrangements. We're different from other other organisms, which is why we act differently.

3. Not. It's yet to be proven that any other life form apart from us can think ou care about others. And by think, I'm not saying know that it exists, but knowing which is its favourite color or what it thinks about death.

That's a weird definition of thought. Some organisms are color blind, or just blind. Knowing about mortality isn't a requirement for self awareness. Whether or not it's proven that other animals are self aware, biology and evolution make us far from clueless when it comes to understanding how we work.

 

[TheCracker]

They do that for its spiecies to thrive. Not because they care. It's the same with us in an elementary level (the base of Maslow piramid).

We are tho only spiecies aware of our finite lifes. Cats or dogs doesn't know they gonna die.

How can an animal have any concept of what it should or shouldn't be doing for it's own species to thrive if, by your own admission, it has no concept of the value of life?

 

[zzz_pt]

How can an animal have any concept of what it should or shouldn't be doing for it's own species to thrive if, by your own admission, it has no concept of the value of life?

I didn't say they do it consciously did I? They just do it.

It's impossible to argue in this thread. I've tried a few months ago and I had 20 people to reply to. Did you even tried to think about what I wrote?

I am suficiently humble to say I don't know a lot of things. But I can't accept criticism of people who refuses to even try to answer some of my doubts/questions.

 

[TheCracker]

I didn't say they do it consciously did I? They just do it.

Then what is it that compels them to do so?

It's impossible to argue in this thread. I've tried a few months ago and I had 20 people to reply to. Did you even tried to think about what I wrote?

Of course i did, that's why i replied

 

[Scaff]

3. Not. It's yet to be proven that any other life form apart from us can think ou care about others. And by think, I'm not saying know that it exists, but knowing which is its favourite color or what it thinks about death.

Except I've already shown you an example of animals (rats) doing just that.

A study published in 2011 conducted by Inbal Ben-Ami, Jean Decety, and Peggy Mason working at the University of Chicago provided the first evidence of empathy-driven behavior in rodents. Appearing in the prestigious journal Science, the results of this landmark study showed that untrained laboratory rats will free restrained companions and this helping is triggered by empathy (Ben-Ami Bartal, I., Decety, J., & Mason, P. 2011. Empathy and pro-social behavior in rats. Science 334, 1427-1430). They'll even free other rats rather than selfishly feast on chocolate. Researcher Peggy Mason noted, "That was very compelling…It said to us that essentially helping their cagemate is on a par with chocolate. He can hog the entire chocolate stash if he wanted to, and he does not. We were shocked." In response to these studies I've received comments such as, "Oh really, I didn't know that" and "Wow, who would have thought chickens, mice, and rats would display empathy for others?"

In an experiment in which rats could have gained additional food (and these were untrained rats), they chose to free a captive rat instead. Clearly showing 'care' for another at the expense of their own immediate benefit.


In short you are simply incorrect.

http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/expanding_our_compassion_footprint/