Angry's Blog of Doom (or idiocy....take your pick)

[Angry_Games]

This is just blatently wrong. Animals have emotions the same as you or I. A dog gets happy when it sees his owner is home to take him outside. The same dog is depressed when the owner leaves. The same dog shows a total devotion to a mate or owner by committing selfless acts of salvation and by being so depressed that he won't eat or drink if someone he is devoted to dies.

 

you know this for sure? You've sat down with a dog and communicated in a clear language with excellent understanding and you guys exchanged exactly how emotions work in each species so you would better understand dogs and they would better understand us?

 

I simply speculate that animals don't have emotions because to do otherwise, is typical human folly. Since WE think it, it has to be true since no one has proved it otherwise. The day I see a scientist asking a group of dogs how they feel about mailmen, and the dogs excitedly talking and arguing amongst themselves over how each individual feels, I will continue to believe that because humans are so different, it is tragic that we continue to try and explain something that we couldn't really have a concept of because we cannot understand an animal like we understand each other.

 

You think of other humans and you think of them in human terms because you yourself are human and know all of the feelings, ideas, etc that humans have, even if you haven't experienced them yourself, you can get a general idea.

 

An animal...lol...how can you even think you would possibly know what drives an animal in it's mind. You think animals maybe think like humans do? How would you know? I've read no science that says conclusively that dogs think like humans.

 

Dogs can pick up human traits for sure...but say you are the 4th generation human that was raised by dogs...would you not have picked up dog traits? Would you still think as a human? Or would your brain debase into instinctive behavior like dogs do?

 

It always makes me kinda laugh when humans claim to know for a fact something that has no facts and hasn't been, nor probably ever could be proven until maybe thousands of generations down the road (between technology and evolution)

 

The fact is that instinct has everything to do with emotions. Emotions are simply mental reactions to events that occur in the environment. Those mental reactions then spawn action (or non-action depending on the case). The resultant reaction-action that occurs due to the interaction of the animal's state of being with its environment we then call instinct.

 

you can prove this is emotion in animals?

 

how about animals that have no concept of fear or loneliness or anger?

 

you sat down with them and talked to them about how they 'react emotionally'?

 

 

Very simply, an animal that is starving feels fear, desperation, anger, self pity, etc for its situation and then decides that it must do whatever is necessary for its survival because the pain of starvation is too intense to bear. An animal that is "in heat" feels axious and an intense desire and in many cases pain to release what it must to relieve the anxiety and/or pain. These feelings and the events that occur because of them are then imprinted into the psyche of the animal so that it learns how to deal with the situation more effectively the next time it occurs.

 

in your mind maybe this is true...but there's no proof that any animal thinks in human terms. As I just pointed out...what about animals that have NOT lived around humans for thousands of years like dogs and cats that might or might not have picked up 'human' characteristics (behaviors yes...emotions...doubtful because of their lack of higher brain functions that humans have).

 

Pick an animal in the wild...an insect? A bird? A hyena? Animals don't have much in the way of conceptualizing fear, love, hate. Most insects and animals there's absolutely no way to prove one way or another because you can't communicate with them...and if you cannot communicate with them, all you can do is try to guess, or conceptualize THEM using OUR HUMAN imagination...thereby humanizing them which is completely wrong because they are not and never will be humans unless they've lived with us beyond the ten-thousand year mark to where evolution would show such a difference.

 

Imagine dogs and cats who have been around humans for say...6000 years if you believe in the Bible or at least believe in old Egypt...they MIGHT have emotions...but those slight emotions are not and never will be what humans think of in terms of emotions.

 

This is, again, the typical human folly. Because we are on the top of the ladder, we are both curious (or we wouldn't think about these things and try to find out) as well as ignorant in the sense we try to think we could understand EVERYTHING since we have the ability to imagine and communicate internal thoughts and feelings that others of our species can listen to or look at and communicate right back thoughts and imaginings etc.

 

The fact that certain imprints are common to all animal life simply brings about the existence of what we know as instincts. Whether or not these imprints are deeply enough engrained among animal life to be imprinted into the genetic code is sort of like asking, "what came first the chicken or the egg?" Doesn't really matter which came first, both are simply the nature of the beast.

 

here you pretty defeat your own statements above in teh sense that you still believe that animals have a concept of emotion as humans do. Your philosophy of the chicken or egg is not even in interest of the original discussion of do animals have emotions.

 

No one has proven that animals have emotions. If anything, the evidence supports that most animals have no concept of human emotions like fear, gluttony, jealousy, love...they only have basic instincts that drive them...and if you don't understand the difference between instinct and emotion...you need to study up on that.

 

Does the ability to reason and imagine separate us?

 

Again, I think not. Animals have reasoning capability.

 

These things are not what separate us from the animals...

 

There is one thing that does separate us from the rest of animal life on the planet. That one thing is quite simply the level of intelligence. We're smarter. That's it. That's all there is to it.

 

*sigh*

 

you've just proven what I said the first time and in this reply

 

intelligence separates us because our intelligence allows us to feel, react, and then communicate it to others in terms that they can perfectly understand and react to.

 

a scorpion busts into a mousehole and nearly gets the man mouse, but something happens and the scorpion bails out...does the man mouse go tell his buddies at the local food scavenge that some big-butt scorpion busted in his house and then he lied and told the scorpion that he was a policeman and if he left quietly, there'd be no arrest today?

 

doesn't quite ring true nor feasible does it?

 

But you and your buddy are talking about girls from high school and you decide you want to tell him about this one girl that both of you liked but neither of you got to even go to first base with her...but you know your buddy don't know that maybe and so you start telling him how you and her got all the way to third base just to sound cooler than your buddy, or maybe to have one-up on him.

 

do ya not see a difference in the interaction here?

 

the mouse and the scorpion are driven purely by instinct. If there's any emotion there, it is not random thought to give the situation context and meaning...so there's no emotion there.

 

you and your buddy...you are conciously trying to make him jealous of you so you lie to him about something that is totally meaningless just to feel a little better about yourself and to feel a little guilty pleasure at knowing that little stab you took at him hurt a little.

 

That's a huge huge difference my friend.

 

You've just proven that we are separate from animals and that they have no emotions as humans would know or understand.

 

 

 

How did we come to be this way? What makes us different? Why are we here?

 

back to the same old question. The mere fact that we can conceptualize something greater and then spend generations questioning and making up more and more fantastic tales and more and more fantastic inventions to better our lives...when no other animal in our 10000+ years (nor anything since the last ice age honestly...which we know and have proof happened but according to religion didn't happen...) of general human civilization has even taken one single step towards evolution on a greater scale...well that makes you feel pretty lonely.

 

Lonely people...have a hard time coping with the thought of maybe we are an accident. But since we have higher brain functions that allow us to imagine, we sooth our emotions (that only humans have) by telling ourselves there's a creator, or we tell ourselves we are in the matrix, or we tell ourselves there's nothing and life aint worth living...we tell ourselves and have told ourselves for thousands of years whatever it is we want to believe with no real proof of anything other than we are the dominant species and the only ones that have formed civilizations more advanced than insect colonies and lion prides etc)

 

Ok, I should have clarified and said that there were no negative consequences to these things. I assumed that this would be understood, but I was wrong....

 

there is balance in the universe

 

there can be no action without consequence

 

there can be no action without reaction

 

it is universally impossible

 

you cannot and no one on this earth can think of a single action that is without reaction/consequence. This makes your question nonsensical really...an un-question that can have no possible answer except the answer of "every action has a reaction".

 

Did we cause this to happen? Can we replicate such a thing? Does this have control over us?

 

we most assuredly didn't cause it to happen unless we are products of a greater creator's power

 

we could probably replicate such a thing given the path that our intelligence is headed down. Each generation of human brings greater advancement. This is incorrectly thought of as good or bad inventions or technology when the truth is, it is neither. It simply is advancement of human intellect. Whether humans apply their own emotions, feelings, influences over it determines whether we as a society or a race consider it bad or good...and even then we can never agree fully.

 

Are nuclear bombs bad? Probably so to most of us, but there are plenty that don't think so. Is nuclear power bad? Not to me, I would prefer the risk of it over the long-term damage that other pollution-filled energies create. Others, however, would scream things at me like 3-Mile island and Cherynoble.

 

The fact is that we are at the mercy of a "higher power". The only real questions that make sense are what is the greatest higher power in the chain of higher powers that control our lives, and is it intelligent?

 

this is your view

 

this does not make it the truth

 

that is foolish to think and I am quite sure you know better...but you might not if this is what has been instilled in you your whole life.

 

I don't believe that there is a higher power that we could even begin to imagine...it would be beyond our imagination...but I simply don't really believe there is anything that is truly conscious of our existence that was solely responsible for our existence.

 

You may believe however...but it is that kind of pushy "I AM RIGHT ABOUT THIS AND YOU ARE NOT" personality that creates conflict in other humans.

 

You don't know that you are correct. No God or diety or creator has stepped out of the sky or through a magical door or down from the Enterprise on a teleport pad and proclaimed that he was there to squash all the rumors about the DFI NF6 and by the way, I am real, all of you nonbelievers...well you just keeled over dead ha ha ha.

 

If there's a god...he ain't answering the phone...but in my opinion, you are calling a number that doesn't exist but the phone company hasn't figured out to not let anyone call it anymore.

 

So please...enough with the "I KNOW IT FOR SURE WHEN THERE'S BEEN NO PROOF JUST MY BELIEF" attitude.

 

You aren't right just because you believe it.

 

 

The universe is, quite observably, a progression of finite events. This chain of finite events must have, at some point, had a beginning. Why? 2 reasons actually... 1) because all scientific evidence points toward this conclusion and 2) because an actual infinite (what you get if you have no beginning) of finite things would never have enough finite space to be able to contain an infinite amount of things. Were the universe to be without beginning, then it would simply fold over on itself and collapse into an infinite blob of infinite density for infinite finite space. And if it had no beginning it must have always been this way and since it is not, once again, I conclude that the universe indeed had a beginning.

 

now all of the sudden you are a theorist who understands what real experts and geniuses have to this day still only been guessing about?

 

our understanding of physics and universal laws are pretty good I assume...for us...but do you know there's not some higher math or something greater that a human could possibly never understand?

 

Do you presume yet again to know for sure exactly how the universe started or why the universe DID start in the first place?

 

I think not...but you might. You can think what you like, but like previous...it does not make it true.

 

What if earth is a marble in some greater being's bag who lives on a world that is just a marble in an even greater being's bag who lives on a world that is yet again just a marble in an even greater being's bag and so on and so on?

 

Why is a concept like this foolish (because I know you have spit your drink out in disgust at such a notion)?

 

It isn't foolish because you don't know it isn't like that. I don't know what the theory of the universe is all about. No one does. We are human and therefore not only are we curious like cats, but we have the ability to imagine such concepts and present them to others (and then feel emotions and get all pissed when someone's view of how things are doesn't mesh with yours)

 

It is possible to say that abstract ideas may generate patterns randomly, but we could not say that those abstract ideas could generate patterns to the extent that the universe is made of without an organining factor (a mind). Further, ideas, of themselves, have no power to create. Only a mind has the power to use ideas as tools (as ideas are not real in the physical sense) in order to organize them and bring them to fruition in a physical state.

 

sure we can

 

viruses on earth are most times random and unpredictable...much like humans themselves are random and unpredictable

 

just because nature around us is random yet overall it is quite predictable does not mean that there are unpredictable, wild, random events that direct the universe on an ever unpredictable, random course...how do we know that we and Earth are not just random unpredictable events in the overall lifespan of the random and upredictable universe?

 

You can't know such a thing!

 

You can only apply human imagination to the concept...but what happens to things that fall outside of the human ability to imagine such a concept?

 

 

So there we have it... God, Allah, the creator, or whatever you call it. There is an uncaused, infinite, unembodied mind that created the universe and knows every tiny detail of it.

 

well, there YOU have it. That's an answer for you, and I respect that, but that isn't what i believe is true, and there are a billion opinions that differ from yours. No one believes exactly what you believe. I bet a lot of people would agree with some or a lot of what you are saying.

 

A lot of people agree with some or a lot of what I am saying.

 

This doesn't make you nor me correct. We believe we are correct. That is our human nature to believe that we can use our imagination to solve our own unanswerable and unknown questions. (ie philosophy)

 

 

I just try to have good solid reason and evidence for what I believe. And I believe wholeheartedly that there is indeed a God, and that God is the same one that spawned us all... not our 5000 different conceptions of "my God, your God" crap.

 

well, when you get some evidence (and just believing in a bible or believing in your concept of what a God is is NOT evidence of any kind) that can prove beyond a doubt that your version of our existence is, I am sure you will present it to us.

 

Until then, I along with many others will keep trekking the path to find the answer ourselves, as I believe each human must do over the course of his life.

 

The unknown is quite scary, but some of us can't allow a hope of what might be to guide us, while others can without any evidence other than what a book says, or what they were taught through their lives, or what conclusions they may have come to during the course of the experience of their lives.

 

(that last part would be me...using my life experience and knowledge to search for an answer that has reality as well as deeper meaning combined to allow me to know there is reason behind my life, and purpose behind my existence...but I've yet to find conclusive evidence so I keep searching)

 

 

There is no version of reality except what exists outside of perception. There are, however, different versions of perception. It is arguable that only perception exists, but then we wouldn't be able to know anything as the universe would only be constantly changing according to each individual perception of it. Since it doesn't do that sort of thing, and the vast majority (except for a few psychotic people) can agree on many aspects of their many perceptions, and since we are able to know things...

 

once again you presume to know for a fact that your version of reality is THE one and only version of reality...I don't really need to say anymore than this about it =/

 

I think it is only reasonable that we say that there is one reality in which all of us live and perceive. Of course, if you don't want to be reasonable, then that is certainly your choice.

 

is that so? You presume to know reality? What if your reality is in reality someone else's reality? How can you be so sure your reality is actually reality?

 

Just because you think it makes sense to you doesn't make it true...unless you are the one true reality, then as I said in my previous post, we are all figments of your reality populating your psyche or mind or emotions to give it meaning.

 

How would we know we aren't real and just part of your mind?

 

Answer = we wouldn't unless you told us, and it would have to be convincing.

 

What if you were crazy and we were the bits of your psyche and you did convince us that you were the true reality? Would you awaken from this reality to the real reality now that you've escaped the prison of your mind?

 

What would the real reality hold that was so terrible that you had to escape to a reality where we were real?

[Burky]

Happy, have you ever had a dog?

If you haven't, then you won't be able to appreciate their emotions.

I am almost certain that dogs have emotions just from the way they behave. They are sympathetic, they get sad, they get happy.

Have you looked into your dog's eyes before?

There is love and affection there. I don't believe that is just instinct. I don't know whether this belief of mine extends to other animals too or not.

And dogs are intelligent; they learn things from being taught, and from bad things happening. Maybe they're not as smart as humans, but they are still quite intelligent.

Maybe their emotions are not as complex as humans are, but they certainly do have emotions.

Could you tell me at which level of intelligence complex emotions become to exist, if you are correct in saying that only humans are smart enough to have feelings?

[Angry_Games]

Happy, have you ever had a dog?

If you haven't, then you won't be able to appreciate their emotions.

I am almost certain that dogs have emotions just from the way they behave. They are sympathetic, they get sad, they get happy.

Have you looked into your dog's eyes before?

There is love and affection there. I don't believe that is just instinct. I don't know whether this belief of mine extends to other animals too or not.

And dogs are intelligent; they learn things from being taught, and from bad things happening. Maybe they're not as smart as humans, but they are still quite intelligent.

Maybe their emotions are not as complex as humans are, but they certainly do have emotions.

Could you tell me at which level of intelligence complex emotions become to exist, if you are correct in saying that only humans are smart enough to have feelings?

of course I have had dogs. Momma and I love dogs and we are looking forward to getting one together when we have a place that has a real yard. I don't believe in having a dog (big dog...we hate little stupid ankle-biter dogs) and having a postage-stamp sized yard for him to be miserable in.

 

if you read any of what I wrote, you will understand that dogs as well as cats (and probably horses etc) pick up a lot of human characteristics and traits from being with us thousands of years.

 

that doesn't give them emotions in the human sense. If any animal could have human-like emotions it would be dogs and cats (I have 3 cats and they definitely each have a different personallity) and maybe horses back when they were our major mode of transportation.

 

But again, you need to differentiate between the unknown internal processes of an animal like a dog and what humans recoginize as 'human-like' thoughts and feelings.

 

You cannot assume that any animal has the same type of higher brain functions than any human does. You can't just 'humanize' something because you want to be able to understand it in human terms with human thoughts and human emotions.

 

I don't know whether this belief of mine extends to other animals too or not.

 

as much as I love my cats and love dogs and watch them use their passed-down genetic traits that they've inherited over thousands of years of domestication...I too cannot imagine that any other animals other than those that have had close relationships with humans for as long as dogs and cats have would even come close to possessing human-like emotions or traits.

 

Except primates...if there are any animals that are closer to humans in terms of 'human-like' traits, it would be the higher primates. I forgot about them in my long rant last night...but I've seen plenty of documentaries that focus on their group habits and they definitely have some human traits like jealousy, rage, love (though none are really what I would call 'mature-evolved') etc.

 

Primates are close to man in both physical looks as well as mental processes...closer than any other animal. Dolphins may be smarter, but they are not built like man and do not have man's tendencies without ever being around man.

 

I'm really not sure what the big issue is as to whether dogs or any animals have emotions. It isn't going to make my week suddenly turn dark if they don't, and I won't win the lottery if they do. We'll be getting a dog at some point and we'll treat that dog just like we do the cats...better than a lot of people treat their own kids (but like parents do, we are mad at the cats right now because they've been little devils for the past week getting into everything under the sun)

[Thraxz]

Here's my typical counter arguement. You've not seen rage in a wolf? Have you not seen fear in a rabbit about to die from an owl?

 

Also, by the same token, you cannot prove that the inner and complex processes in MY BRAIN are the same as yours, so...

[phelan1777]

Just wanted to throw in my .02.

 

I grew up with Cats and to this day they are a part of my life.

 

I second the notion that cats have thier own personalties.

Though they do not feel "love" or express emotions like we do, though I think they can feel our emotions. When we are angery, depressed, upset etc. Cats do have a calming affect with their purring, though it can not scientificaly be proven.

 

I have always associated dogs with a toddler 2 yr olds. They try, but only usually just do what they are told. granted kids feel emotions, but they don't really understand them.

 

You tell a cat to do something, and it just looks at you like "Yeah I will get back to you on that" Dogs, do it, or don't, but if you were to apply a human expression I would say they give you a "dumb" look.

 

yes I am partial to cats, but dogs do have their pluses. Can be great for kids, and home security :-P

 

We as humans just project human emotions on animals because it feels comfortable, and its a basic caring aspect of us humans.

 

Anyway, I agree that we just assign human emotions to the actions of other animals.

But I say dogs are like 2 year olds. I have three kids 9,7,3 so I have a little bit of experience to make the comparison, and yes I had a dog as a pet, and have seen more then enough dogs, and how they act.

Cats, they are the best pet, and yes that is a biased opinion, just as long as they are outdoor cats :-P

[Angry_Games]

Here's my typical counter arguement. You've not seen rage in a wolf? Have you not seen fear in a rabbit about to die from an owl?

 

Also, by the same token, you cannot prove that the inner and complex processes in MY BRAIN are the same as yours, so...

i've never seen rage in a wolf because that is a human trait that we have expressed upon them, but it doesn't happen in the wild (go watch a few National Geographic shows about wolves...their social structure is highly evolved but they don't express human emotions, only natural instincts that have evolved down their genetic lines to keep their social bonds structured)

 

I've never seen a rabbit in fear because rabbits nor any animals that I know of can 'fear' like you and I express fear. Besides, rabbits rarely know they are about to die from owls because owls swoop in nearly silent and snatch them up, so the answer again would be no, never seen that (and I doubt you have to if you think about it)

 

I never tried to prove that your brain and my brain have the EXACT same ways of processing information or emotions other than the true fact that since we are humans and have come from the same genetic evolutionary lines, we both know what things like love, hate, jealousy, fear, etc are. While you and I may place different values on individual emotions, and they might enter our brain differently and cause each of us to see things slightly different or react differently, when you say "love" i know what you are talking about, and when you say "hate" I know what you are talking about because they are feelings that both of us have, and both of us have expressed.

 

If feelings were cars, then your love might be a 1967 Ford Mustang and mine might be a 1970 Dodge Charger...both are cars, but the two cars are different in makeup...yet both are cars and both serve the same exact purpose.

[Angry_Games]

We as humans just project human emotions on animals because it feels comfortable, and its a basic caring aspect of us humans.

 

exactly...we 'humanize' things to make them more comforting to our psyche.

 

 

I will say it once again just to be clear...animals like dogs and cats that have been domesticated and lived with humans for thousands of years do tend to pick up human traits...as to whether that extends to emotions...I highly doubt it, but until me and a dog sit down and hash it out in a discussion, my answer is going to be no, they don't have human emotions. They survive on probably 90% instinct and 10% traits they've picked up from humans...but put any dog or cat back in the wild for even 2 generations, and they will have lost just about every human trait their genetic lines have picked up...within 10 generations its a purely wild animal again who won't go near humans.

[KimTjik]

Happy_Games @

 

Since you're building a case against anyone stating that he knows the truth about ideas beyond human perseptive power, I find some of you own statements being trapped by your own argumentation. Or what do you think about these quotes for example?:

 

No one is perfect. Not even Jesus himself was perfect, because Jesus was just a man (and his most fatal flaw was proclaiming he was the offspring of a God, which puts him in the same category as Greek mythology characters etc)...but he was a very very wise man who knew, like a lot of us know, that doing wrong is just wrong, and we don't need church, god, books, etc to tell us it is wrong.

 

Compared to this statement:

 

this is your view

 

this does not make it the truth

 

that is foolish to think and I am quite sure you know better...but you might not if this is what has been instilled in you your whole life.

 

I don't believe that there is a higher power that we could even begin to imagine...it would be beyond our imagination...but I simply don't really believe there is anything that is truly conscious of our existence that was solely responsible for our existence.

 

You may believe however...but it is that kind of pushy "I AM RIGHT ABOUT THIS AND YOU ARE NOT" personality that creates conflict in other humans.

 

You don't know that you are correct. No God or diety or creator has stepped out of the sky or through a magical door or down from the Enterprise on a teleport pad and proclaimed that he was there to squash all the rumors about the DFI NF6 and by the way, I am real, all of you nonbelievers...well you just keeled over dead ha ha ha.

 

If there's a god...he ain't answering the phone...but in my opinion, you are calling a number that doesn't exist but the phone company hasn't figured out to not let anyone call it anymore.

 

So please...enough with the "I KNOW IT FOR SURE WHEN THERE'S BEEN NO PROOF JUST MY BELIEF" attitude.

 

You aren't right just because you believe it.

 

I totally agree that our short, yes ridiculously short, lifespan should make us very humble, and before we're stating anything being certain we should think more than twice.

 

On the other hand the same humbleness should make us just as careful about denying the possibility of a existing deity. What we can't comprehend by our fantastic, but limited brain, doesn't prove anything to be or not to be true.

 

If you're teaching others and saying that a certain statement of believe which publicly dismiss your disbelieve, or vice verse, is wrong, then you shouldn't repeat the same mistake by telling others what is facts or fiction concerning religious matters.

 

 

Sometimes we differentiate science from religion in the aspect that science isn't guided, limited or crippled by some believes. This isn't the case. No human can totally unfiltered fulfill any task given, so whether we include religion or not a human is still guided, limited or crippled by some kind of believes; may they be religious or not.

 

Few fields of science is so influenced by philosophy like the branches of evolutionary science, whether it's closer to biological or some other science. The search for answers will be guided by these philosophies, and that's one reason why there so many different camps of evolutionists.

 

It all comes down to believes... the difference is how we express them.

[Angry_Games]

ya sorry Kim but I don't see any contradiction in my statements you listed...in one I say that Jesus was a very wise man, and in the second I say that just because someone believes something to be true does not make it true for everyone...where's the contradiction?

 

On the other hand the same humbleness should make us just as careful about denying the possibility of a existing deity. What we can't comprehend by our fantastic, but limited brain, doesn't prove anything to be or not to be true.

 

I would certainly agree with this...it is the unknown that is frightening (and leads us to use our imagination to come up with all kinds of possibilities except those that we cannot imagine...and who can possibly begin to imagine all of the things we cannot imagine??? lol)

 

If you're teaching others and saying that a certain statement of believe which publicly dismiss your disbelieve, or vice verse, is wrong, then you shouldn't repeat the same mistake by telling others what is facts or fiction concerning religious matters.

 

I've never said one way or another that something is true for 100% positive. The only thing that I am sure of is that everyone is wrong and no one will find out what the truth is until the moment of their death (or maybe a few minutes after?)

 

I believe everyone should believe what they want to believe but they should keep it to themselves instead of trying to tell us that their version of of their perception of the universe is correct.

 

Sometimes we differentiate science from religion in the aspect that science isn't guided, limited or crippled by some believes. This isn't the case. No human can totally unfiltered fulfill any task given, so whether we include religion or not a human is still guided, limited or crippled by some kind of believes; may they be religious or not.

 

um...explain this better for me. I don't understand what you are saying here. I imagine it has good insight, but I can't grasp what it is you are saying because the words don't make sense the way they are written (might be that king's english that a redneck like me wouldn't understand lol)

 

Few fields of science is so influenced by philosophy like the branches of evolutionary science, whether it's closer to biological or some other science. The search for answers will be guided by these philosophies, and that's one reason why there so many different camps of evolutionists.

 

It all comes down to believes... the difference is how we express them.

 

yay!

 

that's what I've been saying...yet others keep trying to tell me I am wrong because their version of the universe is the more correct one, yet they only have their belief as proof which is not proof, it is just a belief...

[dab]

I'm of the opinion that when you die, it's all over man. There's just nothing, not that you're conscious of it. Cause you're dead and that's it.

 

I think that the whole idea of hevean/hell/judgement/higher power etc. etc. is just people trying to extend thier idea of thier lives. They don't want to believe that it ends, so they believe whatever rubbish is popular in thier geographic region. This is a defense mechanism really, just the popular coping method and a great way to justify the denial.

[Angry_Games]

I'm of the opinion that when you die, it's all over man. There's just nothing, not that you're conscious of it. Cause you're dead and that's it.

 

I think that the whole idea of hevean/hell/judgement/higher power etc. etc. is just people trying to extend thier idea of thier lives. They don't want to believe that it ends, so they believe whatever rubbish is popular in thier geographic region. This is a defense mechanism really, just the popular coping method and a great way to justify the denial.

well now that's pretty much what I believe, but I also believe we are different in a sense that maybe we have a soul...but I doubt it...

 

but you know...you spout something like this and all the religious nuts try to tell you how wrong you are because your belief goes against theirs...and instead of being tolerant or open-minded and saying "well ok you believe that if you want I can respect that" they end up saying all sorts of nonsense that just kinda makes us glad we aren't religious lol.

 

anyway...I thought we agreed to philosophize about something that didn't involve religion?

 

I'm already tired of the argument because those who believe in God will never accept that other people don't believe in god or their god and will do their worst to try and convince us that we are wrong and will burn in their version of hell.

 

So enough already...please...find something else that doesn't involve God...I'm tired of arguing about it with everyone that doesn't agree with what I believe in.

[OldGuy]

So enough already...please...find something else that doesn't involve God...I'm tired of arguing about it with everyone that doesn't agree with what I believe in.

 

Please do!!!!!! You guys are making my head hurt!!!!!!!!!!!