tl;dr now in stock where available.
If anyone remembers in the intelligent design thread, and you can see it still happening, people keep ticking me off.
Creationism, as you all remember, was pushed to be taught in schools by religious groups, and denied largely on the whole separation of church and state. They revised it, and are trying to push it through again. Here's what it is now:
The assertion or belief that physical and biological systems observed in the universe result from purposeful design by an intelligent being rather than from chance or undirected natural processes.
It still meets more or less the same opposition, but where is their God now? Seriously, where does it imply the supernatural? I tried to explain this, and at least one person got that:
Blah blah blah
...
You're all thinking of creationism. Intelligent design is not based on ancient beliefs either. Ancient beliefs are based on it, and creationism is a crudely simplified version of it.
Finally. I wasn't going to say anything ..., but someone finally pointed out what everyone seems to forget. Even Dawkins has said that he's not opposed to the idea that an advanced civilization seeded life on this planet.
Did this forumer automatically see something with ties to religion and go "RELIGION!
HISSSSSS!"? No. He saw the idea as it is word for word. An intelligence creating life.
Fill in the blanks in this next sentence:
______________ created _____________________.
(An intelligence) (Form of life we observe)
More than just "God" fits in there. Science fits in there. I filled in:
Genetic engineers created
[list of artificial biological life forms on our planet].
(An intelligence) (Form of life we observe)
There is a species of mice that we, an intelligence in this universe, designed with the intent of them developing cancer so we could study cancer. The species is patented if I recall, and cancer research labs special order these mice to aid in research (that guy who thought of making and monopolizing these is a genius).
These mice did not evolve. They were intelligently designed. Evidence for ID? We dissect, culture, study, and design it across the globe.
There's more I can to list. Mostly microbes, but that medicine lactating goat was pretty cool.
So this theory describes the origins of some lifeforms on our planet, and the theory of ID implies elsewhere as well. Do you know what the #1 support for any theory involving extraterrestrial life is? Because it happens here. Such as that's why we look for Earth like planets with water, or at least sufficient water, and within a particular temperature and radiation range. We know it happens on such planets, because it happens on ours. That's the best we have, because that's all we have. Because we intelligently design life, we know that other civilizations can as well. That's just as valid evidence as everything else we have on life not of this world.
Now listen here: ID is
FACT. At least on Earth because of us. It is
THEORY applied elsewhere, but it
is valid theory with scientific fact.
My little mini-case for ID in this post: Our educational system totally blanks out this valid theory, just on the grounds that mainly religiously affiliated groups support it. We are skipping over what is actually real, modern, and soon to be commercial, modern science. It doesn't even imply God anymore. People assume it does, and assume they should take offense. People assume that it is religious because it is affiliated with religion and
THEREFORE has no credit and is in fact anti-science designed to restrict minds, when in doing so they are the ones doing the restricting.
Getting at what I'm trying to: I feel that people are opposing religious related things now by bias. That is so stupid, that it angers me.
I was just on lunch break with co-workers at my new job some time ago, and the taboo topic came up:
"It's brainwashing for the stupid."
"It's a means of control."
"It makes no sense."
"I think it foolish to assume we are the biggest fish and that it's unlikely we are completely alone. There may very well be merit to it."*Everyone looks at me like I'm eating my shoe*I got a warning from my manager. Not my fellow employees, who insulted people, but me, telling me that my
God nonsense didn't belong at work. I didn't want to risk retorting him at the time, so here it is:
WHERE DID I IMPLY THE SUPERNATURAL?
They all
assumed and automatically began singling me out for some time. I never brought it up again, and they stopped insulting me. I didn't want to risk retorting them and would rather time steamrolled over the whole incident. It did fortunately.
It's frick'n animal instincts people are acting on for this subject. Did you know that you get a mild release of morphines from someone agreeing with you? Did you know you get the same for attacking what isn't what you agree with? I'm not sure if Dogma is the right word for this, but they band behind a banner, practically religiously, and rabidly attack what they even
think threatens their rallying whatever. It was the same thing when the Church was big, and these people insult the church. I want to scream at them:
"YOUR MIND IS NOT YOUR OWN!"I said this earlier, but people need to de-polarize their thinking. There's a huge spectrum of grey that people like to ignore and prefer to snap it to their black or white (when there is no such thing), because that, as much as I understand it, is an evolutionary mechanism in social evolution and selection. Animal instinct. If they see someone or something even
affiliated with whatever opposes their rally, they automatically believe there is no value to
anything in whatever it was. I usually sit in the grey, so I see this reaction from a lot of people. You'll see this in politics all the time as well.
I've always considered two ways to approach alien ideas:
1)No/little support-> Absolute rejection from you and proceed to disprove it as best you can.
2)No/little support-> No rejection but no acceptance. Merely acknowledgment and proceed to try to prove it if you can even if you may never. You accept the fact that your thinking capacity is limited, acknowledging the ever possibility of your own incapability of what is beyond you, meaning that you can never truly disprove something. If you can prove it within your limited abilities, it is validly applicable enough in the small scale you function to accept and use within your limited world. If you can't prove it, then you can't prove it but always respect it as possibility because you accept your own limitations.
I swear 95% of the world goes by #1 because it's natural. Recall the Calvin and Hobbes neocubist strip? Narrow minded thinking by instinct.
I used to debate as a hobby (nothing considerable as it was with pot-head philosophers), but we'd take turns swapping sides no matter HOW much we disagreed with what we had to defend and honestly tried to support it. We would
try to see the other side. It really made me think differently. You'd begin seeing both sides (and then take an aspirin for the headache). You would want to, and I mean you could feel it in your gut as your life purpose, go to the lows of ignoring and dodging to rip the other side to shreds in your mind. I learned that there is a bit of truth in
EVERYTHING, the world is not flat, and there is no such thing as absolutes or perfect solutions. The real horror is that there is no real right or wrong. It's a sort of compulsion for me now to pick up sparsely defended views. I'm much more aware now that my mind is not entirely mine, so I try to force an open mind and collect viewpoints while respecting them. The one I cannot respect is this thinking by instinct.
People ever trying to free their thoughts from bonds. They can
FEEL the bonds. So few ever break above instincts or achieve real self-awareness, and none ever completely do. It's depressingly an impossibility I think. Just stimulus-response. I see it and it drives me nuts.
I AM PLEASED BY ATTACKING THIS GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT DOES NOT THINK THE WAY I DO!
SOME OF YOU WILL AGREE BECAUSE IT IS INSTINCTIVE!!!
SOME OF YOU WILL ATTACK BECAUSE IT IS INSTINCTIVEEEE!!!!
HAVE WE TRUE FREE WILL!?!?!?
REJECT ALL THAT IS NATURAL TO RECLAIM YOUR THOUGHTS AS YOUR OWN!!!!!!!!
GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhI should think only a God would be able to save me from my hell for only something beyond my little world could break my worldly bonds.
*Running around Babbling*I feel a lot better now. No! NO!
NO!AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaa
aaaaaa*Running around Babbling*[/list]
EDIT:
Oh yea:
[size=8]tl;dr[/size]Ironically biased thought due to human limitations, the common modern example is thoughts on religion, and a pet peeve from the human condition.
Author
Topic: Scientific Dogma(?), and instictive thought (Read 6227 times)