Russell Chapman wrote:
Doug Pensinger wrote:
But doesn't the randomness of evolution begin to recede once you are
actually aware of the evolutionary process and actively abet it?
An animal with a successful adaptation is unaware of what that
adaptation is, but a human with a successful innovati
Dan Minette wrote:
But doesn't the randomness of evolution begin to recede once you are
actually aware of the evolutionary process and actively abet it?
Then, its not really evolution.
So once we become aware we are evolving, we stop evolving?
As I pointed out, the aberrant behavior of the Iriq
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Robert J. Chassell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Isn't there at least one, however vaguely defined purpose to
> > evolution: success?
>
> No. Purpose presupposes intent. There is no intent in the
> happenstance that some of a set of erroneously self-replicat
> Isn't there at least one, however vaguely defined purpose to
> evolution: success?
No. Purpose presupposes intent. There is no intent in the
happenstance that some of a set of erroneously self-replicated
machines survive and self-replicate better than others.
We attribute intent to o
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Pensinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 2:32 AM
Subject: Re: Religion based ethics
> Dan Minette wrote:
> > - Original Message -
>
Doug Pensinger wrote:
But doesn't the randomness of evolution begin to recede once you are
actually aware of the evolutionary process and actively abet it?
An animal with a successful adaptation is unaware of what that
adaptation is, but a human with a successful innovation can
immediately rec
Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Pensinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I see our morals evolving before our very eyes, don't you?
Not really. Remember there is no purpose to evolution, it just is.
Isn't there at least one, however vaguely defined purpose to evolution:
suc
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Pensinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 11:41 PM
Subject: Re: Religion based ethics
> Dan Minette wrote:
>
> >
> > One of the conclusi
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Doug Pensinger
...
> That gives me the impression that you think we're some kind of science
> experiment.
I don't think that's a logical conclusion. The point is that solving one
mystery, such as the or
Reggie Bautista wrote:
Depends on what exactly you mean by our morals evolving.
Some would say that right and wrong haven't changed, but our
understanding of right and wrong has, just as gravity has been the same
for the past 12 billion years but our understanding of gravity has changed.
So by
Nick Arnett wrote:
Doug wrote:
I see our morals evolving before our very eyes, don't you?
The existence of evolution, whether in biology, morality or whatever,
doesn't rule out the existence of God, does it?
No, not necessarily, but it trumps the need for any kind of faith to
understand morality.
Doug wrote:
I see our morals evolving before our very eyes, don't you?
Depends on what exactly you mean by our morals evolving.
Some would say that right and wrong haven't changed, but our understanding
of right and wrong has, just as gravity has been the same for the past 12
billion years but o
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Doug Pensinger
...
> Let me ask you this, Dan. If morals/ethics are purely a matter of
> faith, and the "rules" as set forth by a god, why aren't they constant?
> Why are slavery, human sacrifice, infa
Dan Minette wrote:
One of the conclusions he accepted was the difficult position someone with
his philosophy has with the foundation of ethics. It was one of his
greatest regrets in life that there was no logical/calculus foundation for
ethics. It was clear, by the nature of his statements, that
On Monday, July 7, 2003, at 07:24 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
I decided to finish my reply on religion based ethics, since there've
been
comments on me ducking the issue. I am more than happy to discuss it;
its
just that it takes a bit of time to clearly express my thoughts on it.
Even if man is 'c
15 matches
Mail list logo
