Descent BB

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

   Descent BB Forum Index > Ethics and Commentary > OKCupid.com sexuality statistics Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bunyip
DBB Staff




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:34 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Flip wrote:
Except for the fact that to consider man to be animals is subjective at best. I guess it helps ones arguments to set the parameters to ones own will, but there's enough evidence at hand to put man into a category of his own. Classification has everything to do with it.


That's bickering over terminology and you're the perpetrator here.

No single, essential difference separates human beings from other animals. You may argue that there is some higher spiritual component, and while I admit to skepticism, I'll grant that for the sake of discussion. The whole certainly does seem to be greater than the sum of the parts, although I credit synergism and serendipity. What I won't stand for is your saying that "because, SPIRITUALLY humans are somehow different from animals, they are therefore also qualitatively different from animals in every other way as well". It just isn't so. There's no "parameters" or "classification" involved. The thing that surprises ME most, in fact, is how thin the line actually is - both physically and mentally. You are just an animal, which may or may not have a magic soul thing attached to it.

Spidey wrote:
So if you can tell me for sure that they are with each other because of a desire to be with another male, and not some other reason…you win.


I think that was the point I was making for human homosexual behavior, in whichever gender. I don't think it's necessarily a choice, or a desire, in the sense that you're implying. When did you choose to be straight? Motivation probably doesn't come into it for most...

_________________
BELIEVE NOTHING, no matter where you read it, or who has said it,
not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason
and your own common sense. - GAUTAMA BUDDHA
Flip
Ace




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:50 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Quote:
No single, essential difference separates human beings from other animals


Really? I could point out MANY essential differences but they seem so obvious to me that it would be pointless. I'm bored with these evolution-creation debates. In the end it comes down to your belief in some magical beginning by accident and my belief in some magical beginning with intent. The 2 shall never meet. You will argue I'm wrong because of your way of looking at things and I will argue the opposite for the same reason. How's that mead coming along? Very Happy
Spidey
Hotshot




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:58 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

I was using desire in this context to mean an underlying preference, not that whole choice or not debate.

To me homosexuality is a preference/orientation to be with a mate who is a member of the same sex.

If animals are pairing off due to an overwhelming instinct to mate, and end up with a same sex partner, because of some reason other than described above, then I don’t consider it true homosexuality.

We as humans then project our own behavior onto the animal and draw conclusions.

_________________
Better to be pissed off, than to be pissed on.
Bunyip
DBB Staff




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 9:30 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Flip wrote:
Really? I could point out MANY essential differences but they seem so obvious to me that it would be pointless.


Just so we have an understanding - you consider the 'higher' primates to be animals as well, correct? Physically and biologically, we're most certainly animals. I'd argue behaviorally as well. Can you define a reasonable number of the many essential differences that separate humanity? They may be obvious to you but I don't see a difference in KIND, just a difference in DEGREE - and in many cases, not all that great of one.

Spidey - Interestingly enough, bias is what prevented a lot of study into the subject of homosexuality in animals up until recently. I've done some further reading as a result of this discussion and learned a lot more about the subject. It's fascinating how bias cuts both ways. In the meantime, I'm going to have to say while based on my reading I disagree with dismissing all of the evidence based on your objections - I'm sure there are plenty of people with agendas who make sorting out the reality a very difficult prospect - in favor of either position. I'm still firmly on the side of "they're born that way (human or animal) - for the most part"

_________________
BELIEVE NOTHING, no matter where you read it, or who has said it,
not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason
and your own common sense. - GAUTAMA BUDDHA
Flip
Ace




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 9:33 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

When did you choose to be a murderer? When did you choose to molest children? When did you choose to shoot heroin? When did you choose to rob the store clerk? Man I could go on and on. Let's face it, people are trying to put homosexuality in it's own "aberration" category because it's victimless, yet it holds alot of the same characteristics as the above mentioned crimes. It's a deviation from the normal standards that human beings hold themselves to, for whatever reason. I mean I'm attracted to the gal that runs the cash register down at the corner store, but to satisfy that lust would surely be a crime. I've actually wanted to kill some SOB's before, but it would have been wrong even though I felt the desire strongly. I've snorted coke, dropped acid and smoked insane amounts of marijuana. Wait, all those crimes involved a victim so they are wrong. I guess the motto nowadays is, no matter how vile or perverse, it's ok as long as your not hurting no one else.
Flip
Ace




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 9:42 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Bunyip, I'd say the most glaring difference is choice. I don't believe animals choose at all. They just do what they do without any thought. It's instinct. Man on the other hand is in total control over his will. There's not one shred of evidence where an animal has been shown to feel remorse, shame or regret for any one of his actions. To him, that is just the way it is, they are just being what they are.
Man on the other hand, will feel everyone of those things because he knows he made the choice himself. If he chooses wisely, he feels pride and good about it. He chooses poorly, he feels regret. All these are chemical reactions that happen within the brain. The difference between man and animals is that man has control over which chemicals get released. Whereas an animal does this involuntarily.
Krom
DBB Admin




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 11:37 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Flip wrote:
Bunyip, I'd say the most glaring difference is choice. I don't believe animals choose at all. They just do what they do without any thought. It's instinct. Man on the other hand is in total control over his will. There's not one shred of evidence where an animal has been shown to feel remorse, shame or regret for any one of his actions. To him, that is just the way it is, they are just being what they are.
Man on the other hand, will feel everyone of those things because he knows he made the choice himself. If he chooses wisely, he feels pride and good about it. He chooses poorly, he feels regret. All these are chemical reactions that happen within the brain. The difference between man and animals is that man has control over which chemicals get released. Whereas an animal does this involuntarily.


Calling bullshit on this. The last time our dog got into the trash she acted all guilty and submissive so we knew she had done something bad even though we hadn't figured out what it was yet. There is an undeniable thought process going on there even though that dog is dumber than a pile of bricks. She knew and remembered that she had done something bad, it was instinct that drove her to do it but she still understood that it was not acceptable behavior.

_________________
(19:11) [D3k]Gooberman: pffft, I didnt get owned baal, you just got 60 lucky fusion shots
Flip
Ace




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 12:04 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Quote:
Dogs have a well-developed social system. This system establishes orderly relations among the members. In order for a group of animals to function efficiently the system must have an order and a process of communication which helps to promote that order.

Social behavior of animals can be organized in many ways. The most famous of these is the "pecking order". "Pecking order" structures a social ladder in which each member of the group occupies a certain rank or position. The highest-ranking bird can peck every other member of the flock without retaliation. The second highest accepts the pecking only by the highest member and in turn can peck all lower-ranking birds. Other species besides birds may also organize social behavior around the general idea of pecking order. However, the actual show of dominance may display itself in a variety of ways. As a result this system is now more generally known as the "dominance order".


I didn't say they were mindless robots. Your dog obviously remembered being corrected by a higher ranking member in your pack, which I'm sure was less than pleasant. It most assuredly wasn't feelings of guilt though, just a ingrained response much like Pavlov's bell.

I watch Dog Whisperer quite often. I think it says alot that, no matter what the breed, the tactics are always the same. Every dog responds basically the same to each situation. They all think the same way.
Grendel
Ninja Admin




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 1:40 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Just because you have a bigger brain doesn't make you a non-animal. Most of your actions are driven by emotions and these are driven by what you would call instinct. About 1.06% of your DNA differentiates you from being a chimpanze. Your biological processes are the same as other vertebrates. People run around w/ replacement valves in their hearts cut out of pig hearts. Go check out what's known about dolphins, may surprise you.

You would think that all that cognitive power would not only allow us to manipulate the environment but also to take care of it. Wrong. We are running the planet into the ground. Why ? Because we are driven by animal instincts. Go figure.

On another note: the sexual preference variations in humans as seen today have been there ever since humans recorded history. No big deal.

_________________
Borders? I have never seen one. But I have heard they exist in the minds of some people. -- Thor Heyerdahl
Durch einen Stich bereits geschafft, erschlafft und ohne Saft und Kraft! -- Donald, examining a Deflator Dextrospirillus
Neo
[deleted]




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 2:02 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Flip, you need to be more bored with these debates and not participate in them... like me ^_~
Flip
Ace




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 2:32 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Quote:
Flip, you need to be more bored with these debates and not participate in them... like me ^_~


Heh I keep trying damnit.

Quote:
Why ? Because we are driven by animal instincts


See, I would say the lack of animal instincts is exactly what's causing this destruction. Everywhere, throughout the whole animal kingdom we see great structure. All social animals have well-developed social systems and great order.
No, it is the lack of these instincts that cause these problems you mentioned. Greed, selfishness, hate, apathy....etc. These are the characteristics that are missing in every other species except our own. I would venture a guess that we possessed these animal instincts, the world would be a well oiled machine.
Grendel
Ninja Admin




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 3:14 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Flip wrote:
Greed, selfishness, hate, apathy....etc. These are the characteristics that are missing in every other species except our own. I would venture a guess that we possessed these animal instincts, the world would be a well oiled machine.

Wrong, most emotions are instinct driven. Your cognitive functions are filtering them to what they show up as. All the emotional behavor you mentioned and more has been observed in non-human animals. Feel free to prove me wrong.

Ever been in a situation where your stem takes over ? An earthquake, burning house, car accident, fight, etc. can get you there. It's an interesting experience of raw instinct at work. You will kill w/o thought to get where you are driven to not even recognizing it. Selfpreservation FTW. W/ the cognitive filter back in place it becomes selfishness, hate, etc.

At the end the problem is that at a certain point our cognitive system took of and the instinct and emotional parts were left behind, getting us out of sync w/ our environment. We are still driven by something that was suitable to survive long enough for reproduction in a setting of 10000 years ago. Rejecting our animal heritage by trying to outsmart it is what I see as a fundamental problem. Your selfpreservation instinct tells you to hord all the resources you can get; Instead of using your cognitive system to do that it should be used to moderate the drive, taking into account the long-term consequences. Alas, I don't see that happen anytime soon tho.

_________________
Borders? I have never seen one. But I have heard they exist in the minds of some people. -- Thor Heyerdahl
Durch einen Stich bereits geschafft, erschlafft und ohne Saft und Kraft! -- Donald, examining a Deflator Dextrospirillus
Flip
Ace




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 3:31 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

No that has not been my experience.

Quote:
Wrong, most emotions are instinct driven. Your cognitive functions are filtering them to what they show up as. All the emotional behavor you mentioned and more has been observed in non-human animals. Feel free to prove me wrong.


This sounds more like the programming we see in computers and animals then we do in humans. I'm usually aware of what I'm doing an why, and I have complete control over my emotions. I have a free will to control everyone of my actions. Have you ever seen the neighborhood dogs when a near female goes into heat? They are the ones driven by instinct and emotions. I am driven by reason.

Quote:
Wrong,

Uhm, no. At best just a differing opinion. To just declare me wrong suggests a high-minded arrogance, and this in the face of compelling evidence to suggest otherwise. At best, we can only state what we believe, to declare the other wrong, you must present overwhelming evidence to the contrary and you havn't.

Quote:
Ever been in a situation where your stem takes over

I mean exactly what does this mean anyways? That my brain stem takes over control of my intellect in dangerous situations?

Quote:
The brain stem provides the main motor and sensory innervation to the face and neck via the cranial nerves. Though small, this is an extremely important part of the brain as the nerve connections of the motor and sensory systems from the main part of the brain to the rest of the body pass through the brain stem. This includes the corticospinal tract (motor), the posterior column-medial lemniscus pathway (fine touch, vibration sensation and proprioception) and the spinothalamic tract (pain, temperature, itch and crude touch). The brain stem also plays an important role in the regulation of cardiac and respiratory function. It also regulates the central nervous system, and is pivotal in maintaining consciousness and regulating the sleep cycle.


I see nothing here that would suggest ANY sort of "takeover" is possible.
Grendel
Ninja Admin




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:18 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Figure of speach.

Quote:
Animals react to threats with a general discharge of the sympathetic nervous system, priming the animal for fighting or fleeing.


Quote:
Panic is a sudden sensation of fear which is so strong as to dominate or prevent reason and logical thinking, replacing it with overwhelming feelings of anxiety and frantic agitation consistent with an animalistic fight or flight reaction.


Flip wrote:
I'm usually aware of what I'm doing an why, and I have complete control over my emotions.

"Usually" ?

Flip wrote:
I have a free will to control everyone of my actions. Have you ever seen the neighborhood dogs when a near female goes into heat? They are the ones driven by instinct and emotions. I am driven by reason.

That would seemingly answer my question then, you have not been in a panic situation yet. Too bad, it's quite an eye opening experience. Dogs are driven by a different mix of instinct, emotions, and cognitive functions. Claiming that your drive is purely cognitive is denial at best. Falls right into line w/ what I said above: "Rejecting our animal heritage by trying to outsmart it is what I see as a fundamental problem." Even for the most rational persons there are many situations that will provoke emotions strong enough to override any reasoning.

_________________
Borders? I have never seen one. But I have heard they exist in the minds of some people. -- Thor Heyerdahl
Durch einen Stich bereits geschafft, erschlafft und ohne Saft und Kraft! -- Donald, examining a Deflator Dextrospirillus
Flip
Ace




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:30 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

No I've experienced those situations sure enough. I would then contest that a human will react in any number of unknown ways, considering his individual makeup, but an animal will react normally much the same. Which is my point.

Sometimes, moreso when I was younger, I might have tended to overreact. An animal though, never, their reactions are very predictable, because, like I said earlier, they all think the same. Within their own kind of course.

EDIT: I guess what I'm trying to say is all animals, this side of some obvious defect, are perfect. They do everything they do without flaw. Man is the only imperfection on this earth, which stems directly from him being able to choose how he thinks on a matter. I would ask someone to find any flaw in nature, and bet big money they could not.
Grendel
Ninja Admin




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:12 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Since when act wild animals predictable ?

Flaw ? In what context ? A hawk killing a mouse did a good job securing dinner, the mouse failed to evade tho. So the mouse is flawed ? It is quite dead after all.

_________________
Borders? I have never seen one. But I have heard they exist in the minds of some people. -- Thor Heyerdahl
Durch einen Stich bereits geschafft, erschlafft und ohne Saft und Kraft! -- Donald, examining a Deflator Dextrospirillus
Spidey
Hotshot




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:14 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

No flaws in nature???

I would give you some, but there is no way I can be objective.

_________________
Better to be pissed off, than to be pissed on.
Bunyip
DBB Staff




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:31 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Wow. Just... wow. Are you just making this shit up to troll us or are you honestly that oblivious? I'm only going to respond to the first thing that caught my incredulity...

Flip wrote:
I watch Dog Whisperer quite often. I think it says alot that, no matter what the breed, the tactics are always the same. Every dog responds basically the same to each situation. They all think the same way.


Hmm. I wonder where we can find a parallel situation for humans. Oh yeah, they call it boot camp.

_________________
BELIEVE NOTHING, no matter where you read it, or who has said it,
not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason
and your own common sense. - GAUTAMA BUDDHA
Flip
Ace




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:01 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Yeah lets just say I'm a troll and oblivious and leave it at that. Oh wait, that's what you did Smile Again, this is gonna come down to fundamental beliefs, like I've said from the very beginning. I see the mouse fulfilling it's purpose, you see him as inept. I see a perfect world, you see unnamed flaws. I see the Dog Whisperer take every single dog that he has ever had on his show and make them react the same way with the same behavior, you parallel it with what? Conformity.

Quote:
Wow. Just... wow. Are you just making this shit up to troll us or are you honestly that oblivious? I'm only going to respond to the first thing that caught my incredulity...


Quote:
No flaws in nature???


Quote:
Since when act wild animals predictable ?


Lol every response nothing more than rhetorical retort. That speaks volumes itself. Here's mine:

Quote:
Wachu talkin bout willis? Razz
Grendel
Ninja Admin




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:22 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Chicken.

_________________
Borders? I have never seen one. But I have heard they exist in the minds of some people. -- Thor Heyerdahl
Durch einen Stich bereits geschafft, erschlafft und ohne Saft und Kraft! -- Donald, examining a Deflator Dextrospirillus
Flip
Ace




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:36 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

LOL jesus you call me a chicken? That's the "your rubber I'm glue" argument, because if you didnt realize it, that's what I just did in my response. At any rate, I was participating honestly, and all I get from you guys is a debate straight from a high school classroom. None of you gave me a legitimate response, and yet you call me a chicken. LOL. You gotta give me something to work with.
Spidey
Hotshot




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 9:04 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Damn Flip, I was just being honest…do you really want me to explain what I believe to be flaws in nature, and would you do something other than disagree with me based on your personal beliefs?

(it was my way of disagreeing without getting into a pointless debate)

_________________
Better to be pissed off, than to be pissed on.
Bunyip
DBB Staff




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 9:05 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

The dog whisperer and boot camp both are successful for the exact same reason: Effective uses of behavioral psychology.

There was an either-or choice to the troll question, but troll would be more flattering Wink I've noticed that when your arguments fall apart in the cold hard light of reason you accuse us of not playing ball. We hit you with facts and you say "that's not how I FEEL about it". You appear to be arguing from opinion, in the time-honored tradition of starting with a conclusion and then attempting to only point out only those facts which support your position.

I admit it's difficult for me not to be derisive despite the fact that I know you're making a good faith effort, and I apologize for that - it's a flaw which I'll probably be working on for the rest of my life.

_________________
BELIEVE NOTHING, no matter where you read it, or who has said it,
not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason
and your own common sense. - GAUTAMA BUDDHA
Flip
Ace




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 9:18 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

No Spidey, in all honesty I knew you were being honest in your response and for the same reasons I tried to ditch this a log time ago.

Bun, although I disagree with your assertion that my arguments are falling apart and that particular spin, let me just say nothing that I've said "is what I feel" but what I have observed myself. In fact you've gave me no real facts to dispute my position, but rather all your comments are mostly just how absurd my position is. You make an assertion about behavioral psychology and that's your argument against my position, the whole time missing the point.

The Dog Whisperer has found out how the dog thinks. So, he uses that knowledge to communicate with the dog to get the responses he desires. That's more manipulation than anything because the dog is not gonna change, he is gonna stay the same no matter what.

In contrast, boot camp has the purpose to conform the individual to a different way of thinking. To tear down what exists and then change the way that person thinks and reacts. Two totally different things that does nothing to support your argument.

It would still be interesting Spidey to name a few, since we're balls deep now.
Spidey
Hotshot




PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:11 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Ok I’ll bite.

Biology is not perfect…case in point:

Cronic pain and suffering…

I have no problem with the normal pain and suffering, it serves a function…but cronic pain and suffering only serves one purpose…total misery.

See I told you I couldn’t be objective. (I have a terminal illness)

_________________
Better to be pissed off, than to be pissed on.
Avder
Hotshot




PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 1:34 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Flip wrote:
Quote:
Flip, you need to be more bored with these debates and not participate in them... like me ^_~


Heh I keep trying damnit.

Quote:
Why ? Because we are driven by animal instincts


See, I would say the lack of animal instincts is exactly what's causing this destruction. Everywhere, throughout the whole animal kingdom we see great structure. All social animals have well-developed social systems and great order.
No, it is the lack of these instincts that cause these problems you mentioned. Greed, selfishness, hate, apathy....etc. These are the characteristics that are missing in every other species except our own. I would venture a guess that we possessed these animal instincts, the world would be a well oiled machine.


Actually, the destruction is because were allowed to run wild. In every other ecosystem a balance is achieved because of a scarcity of resources that forces each creature to either live within the means available or die off. Eventually, as we continue to multiply, were going to run into the same ceiling every other ecosystem does. We'll run out of resources and have to either halt our growth in population to maintain where we are, or worse, start to go backwards as famine sweeps across the earth.

Further, there is nothing that hunts us. There is no predator to humanity that threatens our numbers. The closest things we have are bacteria and viruses, as we've basically made sure were not threatened in any real way by the rest of the animal kingdom.

And those traits are expressed in other animals. A lot of animal social structures can be compared to our own. In fact, a lot of the knowledge we have about how stress affects us, as humans, comes from an anthropologist who was studdying apes (Or chimps, I cant remember) in Africa and made the connection. Animals get depressed too. Animals do have feelings.

The only thing thats special about human beings is that we can communicate verbally and we have bypassed natures natural checks and balances that keeps single species from completely dominating ecosystems. And we might not even be unique in the verbal communication department if those scientsts are right about what dolphins are doing when they make those noises.
Bunyip
DBB Staff




PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 7:29 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Flip, you've made so many misguided statements that I'm restricting myself to what we've previously discussed for now, but your comments on how a lack of instincts is leading us to destruction, for example, are wholly off the mark, and I invite you to read up (thoroughly!) on the plight of the Kaibab plateau mule deer. Although many of the conclusions drawn are controversial, the facts are clear, the mule deer multiplied well beyond the carrying capacity of their habitat, and ate themselves into starvation. An interesting parallel, I think.

Flip wrote:
The Dog Whisperer has found out how the dog thinks. So, he uses that knowledge to communicate with the dog to get the responses he desires. That's more manipulation than anything because the dog is not gonna change, he is gonna stay the same no matter what.


The drill sergeant has found out how the recruit thinks. So he uses that knowledge to communicate with the dog to get the responses he desires. That's more manipulation than anything because the recruit is not gonna change, he is gonna stay the same no matter what.

Both statements are equally valid. And equally false. In pretty much the same places.

Cesar pushes the dog's buttons to obtain a desired response. He often does this in a pack environment in order to obtain further social reinforcement.
DI's push the recruit's buttons to obtain a desired response. This happens in a group environment in order to obtain further social reinforcement.
Both do it multiple times to create a stimulus-response association within the mind of their subject.

Like most analogies there are flaws, but that is the basis of my statement. I can find many more points of congruence between what Cesar does and what occurs in boot camp, just as you can find many disconnects - but the core of what I said doesn't become untrue.

We're wandering rather far afield of course. My contention that animals display homosexual behavior, and that humans are animals, therefore homosexuality was an expected or natural behavior has certainly sparked some conversation - and I haven't even raised any examples of culturally institutionalized homosexuality...

I'll say it again. Humans are animals. Notwithstanding some kind of supernatural component (which I will concede MAY be attached to the animal part to deflect THAT brouhaha), in every other respect we are patently members of the animal kingdom, and any differences you can find are differences of degree and not in kind. Sure, we do some stuff exceedingly well. We're also exceedingly poor at other stuff. Since the only proof you can offer to the contrary is behavioral, I seems to me that you're drawing an arbitrary line.

_________________
BELIEVE NOTHING, no matter where you read it, or who has said it,
not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason
and your own common sense. - GAUTAMA BUDDHA
Flip
Ace




PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 5:11 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Heh, first off it's obvious you've never been to boot camp. You seem to miss the the fact that we argue from 2 different ends of the spectrum. You think I'm misguided because I believe in some magical wizard, I think your misguided because you think every single creature that exists came from a "single ancestral species" and this from inanimate matter. If you believe in creation, my arguments make sense. If you believe in evolution, your arguments make sense. It's the reason you see homosexuality as naturally occurring and why I see it as immoral. One things for sure, neither one of us is gonna make sense to the other, so let's just leave it at that.

Spidey, I understand chronic pain. Although it's not from a terminal disease, I crushed my back years ago that just keeps getting worse. Here's my take on disease. I see the world made perfect but with real dangers. Things that should never be done is what causes these things. People leave piles of trash and feces where they live, rats infest and then a huge plague gets started. They feed ground up cows to the cows and they develop mad cow disease. People drinking blood and other weirdness or turn cannibal, then within a few years a huge flu epidemic kills 100's of thousands. They cramped chickens together in unsanitary conditions and we got the Avian flu .Just basically from doing things that should never have been done or living in unsanitary conditions.
Foil
2*pi*r




PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 5:39 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Spidey wrote:
Biology is not perfect…case in point:

Cronic pain and suffering…


Flip wrote:
Here's my take on disease. I see the world made perfect but with real dangers. ... Just basically from doing things that should never have been done or living in unsanitary conditions.


Okay, pointing out human causes for disease is a fairly common Christian response to the topic of natural evil. (In the past, I might have said that, myself.)

What about disease not caused by human actions (e.g. everything from random genetic mutation to geological disasters)?

Normally, I'd anticipate a response referring to the 'fallen world' described in scripture, but you said that you see the world as made perfect. I'm curious what you think.

_________________
"You seem a decent fellow. I hate to kill you."
"You seem a decent fellow. I hate to die."
Flip
Ace




PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 5:58 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Quote:
Normally, I'd anticipate a response referring to the 'fallen world' described in scripture, but you said that you see the world as made perfect.


No your right. I'm condensing a whole lot into a few sentences, mainly because I'm not real invested in this discussion. I've made the same arguments, with many words and a lot more eloquently before and the points made that were good enough to at least question, always seem to go unanswered as if they were never asked. Yes, I think the world is in a fallen state, but when I watch animal kingdom or shows similar, I see perfection. A glimpse of what it was and what it will be again.

I've really lost my zeal for these kind of discussions, on an internet forum anyways. In person, you can force a person to address something that you've asked that directly challenges his position, as well he can do the same. It's more productive, gentlemanly and keeps cherry-picking down to a minimum. I find it difficult to to express exactly how I feel about something online. I may say some things that can be argued against no doubt, but it always seems the real hard ones are side-stepped in favor of the controversial.
Spidey
Hotshot




PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 6:05 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

JFTR what I have is genetic. So if that’s my fault…well I guess I just chose the wrong parents.

_________________
Better to be pissed off, than to be pissed on.
Bunyip
DBB Staff




PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 6:07 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Flip wrote:
Heh, first off it's obvious you've never been to boot camp.


Nope. I've never put through a wood chipper either, but that doesn't mean I don't have an excellent understanding of how one works - ad hominem implication or not. Smile

Incidentally, I think you've got me wrong. Let's face it, big bang or creation, it's pretty magical either way. What I have a problem with is people twisting reality to suit their preconceptions. There is a whole universe out there that tells us that something occurred. The specifics are certainly open to question, but the broad outlines are painted in bright colors. If your worldview doesn't have at least some congruence then yeah, there is a disconnect and we're not going to be able to have a conversation.

_________________
BELIEVE NOTHING, no matter where you read it, or who has said it,
not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason
and your own common sense. - GAUTAMA BUDDHA
Flip
Ace




PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 6:16 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

You know, up till now all I've said is that a dog cannot change the way he thinks whereas a man can. I don't see that as a huge disconnect. I disputed your boot camp analogy on those grounds. That Cesar bends to the dogs will and the private bends to the DI's. I see a contrast there and you don't. If you think the DI gives one crap about how one of his charges thinks you've got the disconnect. You give away all individuality and are forced to become a different person. A dog cannot change, but the man can and will or he's nixed.

Spidey, I'm not saying anyone is personally responsible for having a disease, but that it could be caused by something that shouldn't have happened many years ago.
Spidey
Hotshot




PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 6:38 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Could be, but I don’t buy the notion that mankind is responsible for every little thing that is wrong. And that’s why I didn’t want to go into this in the first place.

If there is no possibility for even the slightest common ground…

_________________
Better to be pissed off, than to be pissed on.
Flip
Ace




PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 6:51 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Well this is speculation of course. I've thought about this a few times before and these are the things I came up with. I think a great deal of it could be from inbreeding throughout the ages. Inbreeding is actually beneficial for a certain time for breeders, but then after that it becomes destructive. I think a little to much brother on sister, son on mother love...etc. Not too mention that nowadays were eating foods loaded with preservatives, I mean if it can stop the normal rate at which food decays, what can it do to your insides? We're beat on everyday with radio waves from everywhere. Agent orange, DDT and who knows what being dispersed into the air and our water. I know that cigarettes are supposed to damage DNA. It could be from simply smoking damaged DNA gets passed on.
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Jump to:  
   Descent BB Forum Index > Ethics and Commentary > OKCupid.com sexuality statistics

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Image hosting by postimage.org Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group