NOM

I am looking for a bit of feedback.

To set the stage, take the loosely done poll where you ask:

Question to Woman: if there were a fire and you could only save yourself, would you go back for your husband?
Woman's answer, sheepishly given: No, I would save myself.

Question to Man: If there were a fire and you could only save yourself, would you go back for your wife?
Man's answer, soberly given: Of course, you have to save your family even if it costs your life.

While this sounds like a noble answer and one that you have come to expect in a good man, it's also natural selection. Obviously, it's the type of man who would give his life for his wife and children that passes his DNA onto the next generation. The man that saves his own life and lets his wife and children die doesn't pass to the next generation. Example of natural selection.

Given that we can look at what survived thousands of generations, we see what traits are a sign of success.

One that many evolution believers overlook is the belief in God. There isn't a single civilization on the planet that doesn't have some sort of system of God. We cannot prove that there is a God, but we can prove that God is a critical element of every civilization.

It's not important to find God, but it is critical to seek God. Non-believers tend not to survive very many generations. If you don't have a God your children will likely find one. If they don't find a religion, life will eventually give them one.

Most civilizations we have no idea what they believed, if anything. They didn't leave records.

I agree that religion has been an organizing principle for humans.

But the same theory you use for deciding the search for god is a necessity can be used to say that every civilization that believed in a god of this or whatever sort has eventually failed and died out. Therefore the belief in god is a civilization destroyer.

I suspect it's true that societies need belief in a higher power and will always reinvent religion. Science fiction stories about civilizations that have "moved past" that stage are never entirely convincing to me. But it's hard to imagine a lot of counterfactuals, so who knows. Maybe it has happened or will happen at some point, at least temporarily.

One thing that belief in a higher power does is help avoid asking the real fundamental question: why is there anything instead of nothing? (Such a belief doesn't actually answer the question, but it's one way not to have to think about it.)

dogbite wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 4:15 pm Most civilizations we have no idea what they believed, if anything. They didn't leave records.

I agree that religion has been an organizing principle for humans.

But the same theory you use for deciding the search for god is a necessity can be used to say that every civilization that believed in a god of this or whatever sort has eventually failed and died out. Therefore the belief in god is a civilization destroyer.

We know they had Gods or spirits. Usually the evidence we found of any civilizations are their burial practices or temples. Even if they worship the spirits of animals or stars, it still counts as seeking God.

We find objects and places. But we don't know what it meant to them, or what they were for. They'll often theorize religion but we don't have evidence for knowing. We're just projecting from our own behavior.

dogbite wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 6:31 am We find objects and places. But we don't know what it meant to them, or what they were for. They'll often theorize religion but we don't have evidence for knowing. We're just projecting from our own behavior.

So we find objects that we believe to be religious in nature. And we theorize that they were religious in nature.

But you are going to go with the, "we don't know" position.

Fair enough. I can show you evidence. But proof is something the consciousness does with the evidence. Obviously I can't prove anything.

I'm not sure how to set up the equation properly but with almost 90% of the planet believing in some sort of afterlife, I think that you can surmise that natural selection picked those that had faith.

Give this a read.

Body Ritual Among the Nacirema

https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jlawler ... cirema.PDF

I agree with SN, that cultures all seem to have religious belief and that it helps to organize people into civilization.

But, once organized into civilization, can we stay organized and civilized?? Not too sure about that one.

Seems to me that we also have a need to overthrow our oppressors every few generations, whether those oppressors are religious or political. It seems that religion doesn’t change the need to overthrow oppressors because even religion is overthrown when it oppresses. And the US now has oppressors in huge corporations and we are reaching the point of overthrowing them. I suppose I am more worried about this need to overthrow the oppressor and right now some people are very confused about who the oppressors even are. They think it is the government and forget that corporations have bought the government.

alas wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 9:10 am I agree with SN, that cultures all seem to have religious belief and that it helps to organize people into civilization.

But, once organized into civilization, can we stay organized and civilized?? Not too sure about that one.

Seems to me that we also have a need to overthrow our oppressors every few generations, whether those oppressors are religious or political. It seems that religion doesn’t change the need to overthrow oppressors because even religion is overthrown when it oppresses. And the US now has oppressors in huge corporations and we are reaching the point of overthrowing them. I suppose I am more worried about this need to overthrow the oppressor and right now some people are very confused about who the oppressors even are. They think it is the government and forget that corporations have bought the government.

I think that revolution is a fairly healthy aspect of natural selection.

But I wonder what it would look like if we compared the Mormon plan of salvation to natural selection. I wonder how freakishly similar they might be.

dogbite wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 8:01 am Give this a read.

Body Ritual Among the Nacirema

https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jlawler ... cirema.PDF

I cannot counter this paper....., except that I can counter pretty much anything.

I share the belief in parallel realities. How this is achieved is probably different than typical Hollywood depictions. But I agree, or propose, if it is possible then it happens. Sometimes the truth allows more than possiblity. They all play out. If the truth says it can happen then it does happen.

But I don't believe that a new universe is created to play out every possibility. I think possibilities often depend upon observers. And therefore the possibilities often play out in The observers.

But in this case, we are talking about realities that billions of people can observe and come up with fairly common conclusions. That the faithful are chosen to move forward I think is pretty obvious.

dogbite wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 8:01 am Give this a read.

Body Ritual Among the Nacirema

https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jlawler ... cirema.PDF

Hilarious!

Whether or not any or all of those gods exist, the human brain has evolved to expect explanations for things that do not have obvious causes. How do we do that? By assuming a conscious force that would see and interact with the universe in pretty much the way we would if we had unlimited power. Images of gods and goddesses from religions around the globe almost exclusive look like humans. Or to be more precise, like kings and queens. Why? Because nothing is more useful to legitimize a king's power than by claiming it is authorized by the only king bigger than himself. But gods appear and vanish almost as fast as kingdoms. Xenophanes observed that if horses could draw their gods they would look like horses.

I have no doubt that we are part of something ineffable that is bigger than ourselves. We invent gods to help us explain what is beyond the grasp of our very limited senses and the squishy little brains that evolution has so generously given us.

SaidNobody wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 3:22 pm Question to Woman: if there were a fire and you could only save yourself, would you go back for your husband?
Woman's answer, sheepishly given: No, I would save myself.

Question to Man: If there were a fire and you could only save yourself, would you go back for your wife?
Man's answer, soberly given: Of course, you have to save your family even if it costs your life.

BTW, I think you got this pretty much backwards.

Natural selection requires free agency, as it is the organisms themselves that must interact with their environment and make choices - create themselves, change themselves. Self-reliance, independent, free.

Creationism is deterministic- determined, planned designed by a single divine being. Conform, follow, obey, accept, dependant.

Angel wrote: ↑Sun Mar 19, 2023 7:43 am Natural selection requires free agency, as it is the organisms themselves that must interact with their environment and make choices - create themselves, change themselves. Self-reliance, independent, free.

Creationism is deterministic- determined, planned designed by a single divine being. Conform, follow, obey, accept, dependant.

If you swap the term "gossip" with "natural selection" they would seem very similar for humans. In that way, natural selection would require agency.

But if a bigger event or force such global weather change or social danger changes the rules then agency might not be the big factor.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Mon Mar 13, 2023 1:34 pm

SaidNobody wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 3:22 pm Question to Woman: if there were a fire and you could only save yourself, would you go back for your husband?
Woman's answer, sheepishly given: No, I would save myself.

Question to Man: If there were a fire and you could only save yourself, would you go back for your wife?
Man's answer, soberly given: Of course, you have to save your family even if it costs your life.

BTW, I think you got this pretty much backwards.

Ok