Moderator: MagsJ
I'm not sure about self-centeredness because I specifically put thought into how the word would be interpreted and I figured someone would eventually take issue with my choice of words and was prepared for that eventuality, but couldn't think of a better word to portray what I wanted.
James said something that was profoundly insightful which is evolution only works if it's resisted. If you think about it, there must be a competitive force that is fighting, resisting life in order for natural selection to work. If there were no resistance, there would be no selection and no means to evolve into higher life. So if there is resistance, there must be a greater force driving forward that overcomes the resistance.
Atoms form molecules which form amino acids which form proteins which form cells which form organisms. Where does the life property come from if it's not native to the universe? Life has intent, will, which is what fights entropy (apparently).
encode_decode wrote:Now for a confession - not all of what I wrote I believe myself but taking the conventional route seemed like the lame way to go with this topic so I wanted to add some fuel to the fire - it seems to have worked. Now I will only answer what I find applicable from angles I agree with to an extent.
I'm not sure about self-centeredness because I specifically put thought into how the word would be interpreted and I figured someone would eventually take issue with my choice of words and was prepared for that eventuality, but couldn't think of a better word to portray what I wanted.
No, I was not talking about you being self centered. I was speaking about our English language not being expressive enough from the other side of the coin for most topics and this becomes very apparent in philosophy - leading to artifacts like intervention bias. This topic in itself is tricky so I will say nothing more of it here. The main thing to take away is that I am not thinking of you or what you are saying as self-centered - I am certainly not saying that you add a drastic amount of opinion to what you say.
James said something that was profoundly insightful which is evolution only works if it's resisted. If you think about it, there must be a competitive force that is fighting, resisting life in order for natural selection to work. If there were no resistance, there would be no selection and no means to evolve into higher life. So if there is resistance, there must be a greater force driving forward that overcomes the resistance.
That sounds pretty damn correct to me - for there must be a greater force, driving forward, that overcomes the resistance.
Atoms form molecules which form amino acids which form proteins which form cells which form organisms. Where does the life property come from if it's not native to the universe? Life has intent, will, which is what fights entropy (apparently).
Let me put my response a different way - I agree with 98% of what you are saying here plus or minis 2%, which I think is an acceptable degree to say that I agree.
As for the rest of your post I found it very interesting and I would say that I agree with about 85% of it.
Do you think culture might play a part in evolution?
Selection of mates for mating etc.?
Mr Reasonable wrote:Also Ryan Lochte was as high as a kite, or hung over from the night before. Have you ever heard that guy speak? I don't think it was the other athlete's performance enhancing drugs, I think it was Lochte's performance reducing ones.
It would seem that the empowerment of women is shooting ourselves in the foot. Whatever we are consciously trying to do, evolution will be fighting it. So all this progressiveness can only lead to one end.
Prosperity causes its own destruction as generations lose sight of why silly traditions exist.
encode_decode wrote:Serendipper
Brilliant post, I particularly like the following:It would seem that the empowerment of women is shooting ourselves in the foot. Whatever we are consciously trying to do, evolution will be fighting it. So all this progressiveness can only lead to one end.
Prosperity causes its own destruction as generations lose sight of why silly traditions exist.
Congratulations on a very thoughtful post.
Zero_Sum wrote:Once you understand feminism as the direct result of a pogrom to eradicate whiteness and destroy western civilization it becomes much easier to understand what it is all about.
Serendipper wrote:Zero_Sum wrote:Once you understand feminism as the direct result of a pogrom to eradicate whiteness and destroy western civilization it becomes much easier to understand what it is all about.
I think it may be the other way around... the pogrom is the result of feminism.
Zero_Sum wrote:Serendipper wrote:Zero_Sum wrote:Once you understand feminism as the direct result of a pogrom to eradicate whiteness and destroy western civilization it becomes much easier to understand what it is all about.
I think it may be the other way around... the pogrom is the result of feminism.
Explain.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot]