Amos Moses #fundie

The "Live by The Science Die by The Science" Award

Amos Moses #fundie christiannews.net

Do not worry, you hopefully will grow out of your presumptions.

But yes, you are presumptuous to apply what applies to science, evidence, and then try to apply that to religion. Religion is not science. Although, God invented science.

If you want to live by science alone, then you should consider the implications of that. Evolution does not recognize right and wrong, or even your rights. You only have the rights, under evolution, that a stronger person is willing to give you. If they want to make you their slave, for their own survival, then you have no complaint. If you are beaten out on the street or in your home, you have no complaint, that is evolution.

So if that is the standard you want to live under, you should have no complaints whatsoever if you are taken advantage of as there are no standards of right and wrong, there is no mercy, there is survival, and it may not be yours.

You should not be on any forums arguing about how unfair things are for this group or that group, evolution does not recognize if it is "fair" or not. Evolution does not care.

The only "presumption" is that you are either predator or prey. Again, if that is the standard you want to apply to your life................have fun with that. But do not come to a christian site and complain about how we treat you, that is the standard you have set for yourself. That is what you think you want. You should have no objection to homosexuals being treated in a way you find objectionable, or if someone is "bullied". That is evolution. In fact, you cannot even HONESTLY complain about any "hypocrisy" you may perceive as evolution does not care if a person does that.

28 comments

old comment by Kanna

Evolution got us to this physical stage. Society and civilization got us to this mental stage. The concept of "right and wrong" is part of both of those developments, and we can see first-hand that different global societies have different moralities and codes of conduct. Even animals can have their own social rules.

Those who break the rules endanger the cohesiveness of the society, and are punished or cast out. Within the larger framework of evolution, if you endanger the society then you endanger their survival. The impala that first sees the lion may cry out and run - by so doing, he draws the lion's attention and endangers himself, but saves the rest of the herd. Evolution is not value-free; "right and wrong" have always been part of evolution.

old comment by Dr. Razark

Why would you ever get the idea that evolution is some sort of moral code, rather than a description of a biological process?

And you seem to imply that a system of morals cannot be created by humans without the intervention of your god. For this exercise, I shall assume you are Christian, but I'm sure that you can work out how this is just as effective if you follow some other religion.

You are Christian. Your moral system comes from your god. Muslims have a different god, but they also follow a moral system. Hindus follow an unrelated religion, and yet they have a moral system. The Chinese, Japanese, ancient Greeks, Romans, Babylonians, Germanic tribes all follow different religions, but all of them have systems of morals. Obviously, you can see that your god is not required for people to develop such a system.

"Ah!" you exclaim. "But my god has imprinted his moral code on the hearts of all people! Even if they refuse to believe it, he is still the great author of morals!"

Ok. So, if he is the great source of morals for all the people, then why do those moral systems differ from each other so much? Clearly, some of them have interacted, but enough differences exist that these systems are obviously not attributable to the same original source.

old comment by Anon-e-moose

#1923700

Richard Lenski - concerning E-coli - would like a word with you. Also, explain how Nylon-eating bacteria came to be, when that man-made substance didn't exist until the 20th Century?

Geneticists proving that we humans share at least 98% of our DNA with Chimpanzees. Thus Darwin was right all along. But then...:

...the Church of England - who openly admit that much of the Bible, including Genesis, is purely fable & metaphor: as in not to be taken literally - agrees with him, don't bother them about it.

That's the problem with mere 'theories': they have a rather nasty habit of being proved fact. The recent discovery of those two black holes colliding - thus the ripples in space-time - which proved the Theory of Relativity of Albert Einstein: a century ago. Ergo, the Facts of Relativity. The findings by those geneticists...!

old comment by Smidgy

But yes, you are presumptuous to apply what applies to science, evidence, and then try to apply that to religion.

Why?

If you want to live by science alone, then you should consider the implications of that. Evolution does not recognize right and wrong, or even your rights.

Broadly speaking, this is correct. However, there is very probably advantages to living in a society which has some kind of fair moral code that applies to all - certainly in the case of species that have achieved the level of complexity as humans. This can be seen by the simple fact that oppressive dictatorial societies generally have uprisings/rebellions/coups/whatever leading to bloodshed at fairly regular intervals, whereas more fair and democratic societies generally don't.

You only have the rights, under evolution, that a stronger person is willing to give you. If they want to make you their slave, for their own survival, then you have no complaint. If you are beaten out on the street or in your home, you have no complaint, that is evolution.

So if that is the standard you want to live under, you should have no complaints whatsoever if you are taken advantage of as there are no standards of right and wrong, there is no mercy, there is survival, and it may not be yours.

Except, depending on exact circumstances, it is entirely possible that cooperation between individuals within a species may be more advantageous for that species than competition between them. Nature has a pretty wide variety of species that live in groups for this very reason.