January 29th, 2011, 03:46 PM
I believe we are natural and we do what is in our nature. There for everything we have done is natural and however we come to an end will also be natural even if we cause it ourselves.
The reason I bring this up is because humans tend to place themselves and the things they do outside of nature, and it's just not true.
I used to wonder why a birds nest is considered a natural construct but my flat unnatural; the same principle applies, materials manipulated to serve a purpose.
The only problem is that if everything we do is natural, then the word natural has no meaning. We use it to differentiate between what we do and what animals do - that difference being scale with an ostensible rationale as opposed to the instinctive small scale stuff of animals.
But i agree, the word unnatural is unsatisfactory as it suggests this process occurs outside of nature - obviously not so considering its broad definition of being all physical things and phenomena.
We should use a different word.
I guess 'natural' would be the contrary response to those who believe that humans are somehow made 'special', by some intent, having some destiny, all other organic life being secondary to our own status; however, I'd say that we human mammals are just as natural and organic as anything else in nature.
That's a very good example.Originally Posted by Prometheus
This is also a good point. I wonder if it's natural for humans to survive long enough to get off this world and populate other worlds or do we just go extinct like all other species on this planet have or will do sooner or later?The only problem is that if everything we do is natural, then the word natural has no meaning. We use it to differentiate between what we do and what animals do - that difference being scale with an ostensible rationale as opposed to the instinctive small scale stuff of animals.
I like that idea, do you have any ideas about what that word should be?But i agree, the word unnatural is unsatisfactory as it suggests this process occurs outside of nature - obviously not so considering its broad definition of being all physical things and phenomena.
We should use a different word.
But I do feel special, at least more special than say a dung beetle. But then a dung beetle wants to live and procreate the same as I do, and evolution put him in his niche the same as it put me in my niche. Still glad I'm not a dung beetle.
The great equalizer stalks all creatures made, lying ever just ‘round the corner in the shade, taking both human and the beetle as one, after their lives are spent from rolling some dung.
January 29th, 2011, 08:34 PM
I can only assume that what you are saying is that it is not "right" for humans to place themselves outside their confinement of being connected to nature?
January 29th, 2011, 09:03 PM
Okay I can stand that correction. Sounds good to me.
I can only assume that what you are saying is that it is not "right" for humans to place themselves outside their confinement of being connected to nature?
January 29th, 2011, 09:34 PM
Thanks Captain Obvious. :P
January 29th, 2011, 09:39 PM
I can only assume that what you are saying is that it is not "right" for humans to place themselves outside their confinement of being connected to nature?
And in adding to that, some would also argue that going beyond our biological frame is considered as divine.......which according to many is defined as "right".
January 29th, 2011, 10:26 PM
You'd be surprised how many people need to see and hear the obvious.Thanks Captain Obvious. :P
I guess believing in sky fairies is natural too. Believing has to be a relative newcomer to the natural world, at least this one. The subject of beliefs however, may not fall under the natural category. Natural in some cases to believe in pink unicorns but in reality the unnatural horned equine exists only as a thought. Is everything imagined unnatural?
Natural humans aren't perfect. The fact that we can believe in unnatural things is natural for humans. But it can be fixed with education and a great deal of intimidation. Oops! I forgot intimidation is not a politically correct thing to do. Well I guess the pink unicorns will be around for a while unfortunately.
Also, unfortunately extinctions do happen and they are natural.
THE NATURAL HAPPENINGS Why these little subatomic things, ask the wise, in such amounts and of their special size? Well, I agree that this shows they had to be made, as we see from the causeless quantum’s shade—it’s been shown by aspect there’s nothing there, underneath this necessarily indefinite disorder, whence opposite particles become, unbidden, for causes beneath causes would have no border. So, from this causeless bottom, where bucks stop, hails the ultimate freedom to live and be a lot. This scheme, too, hints that the ultimate yore, if it could ever be, would need cause all the more! Yet, at this very point, which is not an answer, but a call to think no more, and surrender, religion introduces complexity infinite for the downwardly simpler bottom unit. So, there’s no answer given, but only a larger mystery of the one and only, one that is an infinitely larger question there, rendering the entire ‘answer’ much beyond repair.
While both science and religion claim the causeless, they are as opposite as could be, none the less, for one finds no specifics there, none at all, while the other imagines God’s perfect ordered all. If all the above opposed were not bad enough, there is entirely insufficient evidence for God; zero, in fact, in the face of the opposite there, for the one who is supposed to be everywhere. Beyond even the total absence of evidence for the interceding ruler, an obvious nonpresence, leading to the sure evidence of absence, is that a first cause can have no reason to it. Humanists [nontheists] push science forward, God naturally flunking out, with no push backward, while creationists, with nothing of to push forward, ever attempt to push science backward. This, then, is the end of faith’s season, it becoming the celebration of rational reason.
So you think the world is on the threshold of a stunning rejection of all things divine? Not going to happen if we're impatient. Theists are their own worst enemy, so they'll probably end up accomplishing this all by themselves. Feel fortunate that you are endowed with the necessary equipment to understand what the evidence is telling you. My advice: have kids and pass it on, just in case it's genetic. (reading Dawkins right now so I'm profoundly influenced)
@ zinjanthropos
I'm very interested in Dawkins theories about memetics, so if you run across anything interesting open a topic please.
No, but it's moving faster than what was normal, as there was a significant 10-14% drop in church attendance in the once stable U.S. northeast. They don't look at the west coast figures, for those were already doomed long ago.
It's more like the older generation of believers will not change much, but just die off, the younger generation having much less belief, all of this translating into a big drop matching that which Europe already had.
Religion came naturally and will leave the same way. Would love to be around when it is finally dead enough to ignore or not be noticeable.
I'm reading The Greatest Show on Earth at the moment. Great stuff. I'm about two-thirds through and I can't remember even seeing the word 'meme'. This book is basically all about evidence for evolution, some I've seen before. Why don't you open a topic on it?
ACCEPTANCE OF THE NATURAL I accept almost everything, except maybe mosquitos, although they are probably a necessary part of the food chain. I ‘accept’ because the world is perfect just the way it is for the evolutionary stage it is at. Of course, any one thing on Earth probably has a mixture of good and bad uses, yet, if we were to take it away, the whole balance of the Earth might collapse. True, we have crazy emotions sometimes, some of which are rather useless now, or almost so, that are still forced upon us, very much uninvited, such as trivial jealousy and anger, and, as well, children’s emotions are not mature, and teenagers have wild hormones and holes in their brains, and both apparently bring great suffering to all, not to mention what the deviants and low-lifes of the world do to us and each other—but all this is just a stage that the very primitive and mostly infantile human race is floundering through.
I accept even death, for without death we wouldn’t even be here, for our human ancestors evolved because of it, and if they would have lived forever then not much DNA would have ever changed. I accept the natural world and even the humans mentioned above that are just as much a part of natural world as anything, crazy as they are, for, without the beast in us, for example, there would have been no zest for life. We have probably survived not in spite of being brutal, but because of it, and at least it may have led to cooperation for the hunt and for war.
I accept bacteria and all the diseases they bring, for they also ferment the soil and aid digestion. I accept bugs and worms, although I am still working on accepting mosquitoes. Worms, for example, aerate 400 tons of soil per day. No worms, no life; so, please give a worm a hug today. The same with flood and drought, for the universe has our well being at stake only in the most general sense, but not in any specific sense. A farmer’s crops may dry up or get washed out, but, again, if there is no water, then there is no life. Well, anyway, it’s warm here, but there are no mosquitoes, so, I’m really extra happy about that.
DNA Proto-man gave way to near-man and thence to us, eventually, when two ‘monkey’ chromosomes fused together, making ‘us’ incompatible with the other chimps We have 23 chromosomes. Two of them merged when we were ‘monkey’, as we used to have 24, like the chimps. This allowed us to go our own way, for then there was no more monkeying around. And so our ancestors, then, truly descended from the trees! We came to need no specialized niches, since we could adapt to any terrain, having brains that could learn much more after birth than instinct could bestow before. DNA remembers every step of our evolution—and you can see this in ‘fast’ motion when embryos form, simply, in the liquid womb, replicate, and then grow cells that diversify into a human being after going through the nonhuman stages. Thus, four billion years compresses into the nine months of pregnancy.
NON-CENTRIC It was said, probably by the right-brain, that humans are the center of the universe… This is called human-centric, the stance that man is the measure of all things. It is neither meek nor humble to suppose that humans are so special and/or even deserve reward, such as in an afterlife. The time of our universe happening is not of any special moment; it’s here now, at any old time. Therefore, any universes could be, any time, or even at the same time, and likely anywhere. And so could be life, since for decades now, prebiotic molecules have been found in space and on meteors; so, we’re not even likely life-centric. There is no Earth-centric in the solar system; it is sun-centric; nor any time-centric, as shown, nor galactic-centric, for we are out on an arm, nor any super-cluster-centric, nor even universe-centric, nor not likely even multiverse centric.
Pride: ego exaggerates self-importance to claim that we’re specially created, deserving the reward of a divine destiny. Humility: we’re electro-bio-chemical, just as organic as anything in nature. It is pride, perhaps, when one wants to be King or Queen of reality.
Yes humans are 100% a natural biological machine .
A Car for example a 100% mechanical machine that humans have built using materials soured from our natural planet .
Both are made from the materials of nature .
Because there is no such thing as a "not natural " . since nature is all there is .
The question is a complete contradiction in terms .
Though if you wished to be confused you could say "well that depends on your "definition of nature" .
Though even if you used the definition of "man made" .
All that has been "man made" has been sourced from nature and made by a animal made from flesh,blood ,bones etc = humans .
How about asking! what has not be produced from nature?.
And you will not be able to answer that question correctly either,though some will try using there natural brain, because everything is natural .
Hehe
If mosquitos did have a brain that could think on a human level they'd probably say in buzzy voice way .
Mosquitos aren't part of the problem ,Some human lifestyles are the ones that will have to change.
Yes, mosquitos have a point of view, too, and, if I were a Buddhist, I'd have to relocate them to a better home, instead of a swat.
| « protestant divine inspiration | Taoism enlightenment: Absolute Happiness. » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
