Dawkins getting slaughtered

Two seconds ago you said you had faith in a diety being unlikely... stick to one answer - it's hard to pass comment if you flip-flop

Really?

Darwinism teaches us that we have no free will, free will is a creation of the religious mind; G-d granted man to do both good and evil... Darwinism teaches that all men are born of a similar nature and it is their environment which sculpts their personality.

A serial killer wasn't born evil, he was the victim of circumstance.... How can you find morality in an environment free of individual blame?

Really which elements of Judaism?

For me the clause which states that a land once governed by muslims can never be governed by infadels is deeply disturbing as it directly effects me... Also the whole dhimma status is deeply troubling.

I've never stated it was, but his has sculpted modern morality on every nation as historically it was the means by which man defined his ethical backbone.

It is only really in Europe, Russia & China where we're moving away from our traditional moral anchor and it could be argued that the worlds most horrific genocides/wars were a direct consequence of this movement away.

What does the formation of the schism have to do with their teachings? It is man's nature to cluster into tribal circles... Arab communities are deeply tribal and their conflicts have nothing to do with the Qur'an... To suggest or imply so indicates a great ignorance on the middle easter pschee.

What the fuck arte you talkin about?

I find the buddhist morality deeply moral and highly admirable.... that doesn't make me a bad jew you clearly haven't got a fucking clue what your talking about when it comes to religion mate

It 'teaches' nothing of the sort.

Personally I cannot see how free will could work on a molecular, atomic and subatomic level (every interaction should be predictable), but that's not Darwinism, its reductionism, and reductionism to a degree that most biologists wouldn't agree is a useful model for study.

Darwinian morality suggests that elements of modern morals can be associated with survival advantage (and can be observed in animals), and this is likely to be the source of at least some of them.

Religion teaches that 'absolute morality' both exists and comes from deity and scripture. The fact that people never exposed to judeoislamochristian religion make exactly the same moral decisions as those who have been implies that morality has a basis that goes back far further than whenever the scriptures were concocted.

To believe that morality comes from your religion, therefore, flies in the face of the evidence, and also you'd think that there'd be some suggestion that atheists would be less moral than religious people - needless to say, there is not the slightest scrap of evidence for this either.

I love it when you post 4 paragraphs of utter tripe

"With respect to free will, seeing a puppy playing cannot doubt that they have free will, if so all animals., then an oyster has & a polype (& a plant in some senses, perhaps, though from not having pain or pleasure actions unavoidable & only to be changed by habits). now free will of oyster, one can fancy to be direct effect of organization; by the capacities its senses give it of pain or pleasure, if so free will is to mind, what chance is to matter (M. Le Compte)—the free will (if so called) makes change

in bodily organization of oyster. so may free will make change in man.— the real argument fixes on heredetary disposition & instincts—.—Put it so.— Probably some error in argument, should be grateful if it were pointed out.— My wish to improve my temper, what does it arise from but organization, that organization may have been affected by circumstances & education, & by choice which at the time organization gave me to will—Verily the faults of the fathers, corporeal & bodily are visited upon the children.—"

You obviously don't know the first thing about Darwinian thought if you believe it accomidates free will

probably not, I am an atheist after all. I can safely leave all the pork banning and not treading on insects and worshipping cows and all the rest of it to you lot to scrap over

I dont believe man evolved in the way you think man evolved - I think human intelligence exists outside of micro-macro evolution.... Darwinist believe it is a product of micro-macroevolution

There is no denying that morals evolve alongside societies... but those morals can be at complete opposite ends of the spectrum of our morals (from human sacrficies to sun G-ds too the teaching and shagging of 11 year old spartans)... However I believe it is religion that binds down morality for without a clear right and wrong the morality is in a constant state of flux.

Unfortuatly because of our stage in history we can only examine the last 100 years for evidence of religious free societies... And although they have been horrifcly brutal and moral-free; it is far too early to draw any solid conclusion.

Darwin devised not only the most powerful theory in history to explain the origin of complex life, he also devised the only credible explanation for it. But just because Darwin said something doesn't make it Darwinism as we use the term.

My lack of free will theory is based on physics, not biology, and evolution has no part in it. I agree that human and puppy movements are currently so unpredictable as to give the appearance of free will, but I think that every interaction can potentially be reduced to a predictable one. If you think we have free will, then perhaps you can explain how it works? At what level does your brain introduce the decision? Should I have a tea or coffee? What fires the nerve cell in the tea direction? What fires what fires the nerve cell? And you regress it back to the subatomic collisions that are due to...other subatomic collisions, which are predictable.

If someone can provide an explanation of how free will works I'll happily accept I'm wrong but it's nothing to do with Darwinian evolution either way.

No I believe the majority of men or born with the ability to do both good and evil... but they are born with this capacity... darwinism teaches that good and evil are concious creations so they cannot exist at brith - rather our pyschee is a product of our environment.

No, biblically the Jews cannot control Israel until the coming of the Moshiach.

Historically on the whole Muslims and Jews have ot on fine as long as the Jews are a dhimmi under muslim rule (asd dictated by their religion).... the current conflict has nothing to do with religion.

You're talking about 3,000,000 in contrast to about 200,000,000.... they're not even on the same scale.

But there would still be the kurds, there would still be the muslim tribes (now just tribes) of different geographical origins... battling for control of the same land.

To blame this on the religion is idiotic, where in the Qur'an does it say sunni must fight shiia?

Am I going to have to start quoting the book of judges at you again

Modern predominantly secular Europe is on different level of morality to your ancestral nomads, if the bible is to be believed.

lol its completely to with darwinism, he wrote about it in great depth.... its amazing how quick your opinion changes when one posts up a quote from your idol

I wish my opinion could change that "freely"

really? where in the bible did we engage in a mechanical genocide of 12 million?

Darwin referred to black men as savages, that doesn't mean I agree with it just because he also wrote the theory that freed humanity from superstition

Hitler was a religious man, who justified his oppression of homosexuals on the bible you claim to draw your morality from. Just because he had more effective methods of slaughter at his disposal as a result of technology doesn't really influence his evil-factor.

Anyway, in my lifetime we have certainly not invaded other european cities and slaughtered all the men women children and animals, we have not offered up our daughters for gang rape by visiting men, we have not chopped up our concubines after they have been raped and sent their parts all over the desert, we don't murder people for collecting twigs on a sunday, we don't stone disobedient children to death. Absolute morality? You'd have to be theologically minded to think so....

In private Hitler was an athiest you putz, he was publically christian for propoganda reasons... The vast majority of the SS governing class were athiest or pagan (norse mythology).... The holocaust was based on secular prejudice born out of the racial science of the early 20th century which at its core revolved around Darwins survival of the fittest.

Homosexuals and retards were murdered because they were deemed weak and an acheles heel of the aryan race.... This was pure darwinism.

As for your lifetime, we're invading Iraq at present, we invaded afghanistan, etc. and in fiarness 50 years in the history of mankind is nothing... there have been much longer periods of peace between states.... Your grasp of world history is about as solid as your grasp of darwinism

before the koran there was no sunni and shia .fact.

find me anybody who believes they are not. In your earlier post you appeared to say that some people are born evil.
Most Darwinian scientists believe that we are born without good and evil... Only those that believe in a good and evil believe in the concept.

I think your grasp of darwins teachings is as dodgy as mine is of the Torah. I'd love to see the quote from Darwin where he says this. As an atheist I don't believe in the concept of 'good and evil' only actions by people which have beneficial or catastrophic results.

The Asa Gray dialogue covers the good/evil subject in depth and it is more than apparent that darwin was of the mind that good and evil are products of environment - not something we are born with.... It is perhaps you who does not understand darwinian philosophy and its implications

the sunni and shia just happened to fight each other because they are 'different tribes'
You clearly don't understand how the middle eastern mindset has evolved, the arab nations have always been governed by external empires (be it the persians or turks) they were ruled through controling the tribes; the modern day conflict in Iraq has nothing to do with shiia and sunni, it's too do with the tribal forces clashing for power (there are more tribes than just sunni and shiia); these tribes tend to allign themselves with religions - but the conflict is not a product of the religions.... I suggest you do a little reading before talking out of your arse.

To blame the current violence in Iraq on islam is the stupidest thing I've heard all day (and I've been talking to drummers )

The jews are all secular, the state is whiter than white The controling Jews are secular and the state was founded by secular socialist Jews... or are you going to tell me otherwise like when you took a guess at understanding darwinian thought and when you took a shot in the dark at the Iraq conflict.

when it comes to positive things like the moral code of mankind or the prevention of war then it's all down to religion
Where have I mentioned the prevention of war? most religion support war.


before the koran there was no sunni and shia .fact.
Thats like blaming the war in Northern Ireland on the people that speak english... before people shared shared a common english language, there was no war in northern ireland.

Islam has nothing to do with the current Iraq conflict, the shiia and sunni muslim was born long after the Quran... so one could say after the quran there was also no sunni and shiia... whats your point?

twat

darwinian scientist or not, everyone believes that...... 'the majority of men are born with the ability to do good or evil' ........your quote. Which bit of that do you disagree with? I don't understand the point you are trying to make (other than being contrary for the sake of it )
or do you in fact think that people are 'born evil'

the quotes you gave show that Darwin was confused as to the nature of free will that's all. You seem to me to be as confused. Do we have free will or not?

I think I have as good an idea as you as to 'how the middle eastern mindset has evolved' you arrogant prick.
again you insist that a good outcome is due to religious influence and a bad one is not. It won't wash. most religions 'support war', you say. dam right they do, they are often the cause of it . A fact you like to gloss over by drawing attention to the wars it did not cause.

And the Northern Irish context is apposite. As in the sunni shia conflict the prot catholic religions gave a context and a justification for mass murder. That was their effect regardless of whether it specifically says go kill protestants in old so called holy books.
And while I'm on about the holy book there is plenty of exhortation to ethnic cleansing and war in there. So much so you could say that god was the one born evil

I believe man is created good but he has the implication to lean towards evil:

"the inclination in man's heart is evil from his youth." Bereishis 8:21

Then you haven't understood what you are reading; Asa Gray puts forward the notion that free will was created by an intelligent designer; Darwin replies that free will is a man made concept; natures reality is that everything is a product a of his environment - including good and evil.

If a man/puppy commits a positive act he is doing so in reaction to his environment, if he does a negative act this again is a response to his environment... thus the question of good and evil become irrelivant as he is merely responding to his existence.

I am of the opposite mindset; man is not responding to his environment, but responding as a human... just as we all have different faces as a result of genes; we also have different personalities, these personalities are unquestionably influenced by our environment, but how our environment is interpreted is a product of our personality and soul.

clearly not as you think the Israel/Palestine problem is one of religon and the Iraqi crisis is a problem of islam

I find this interesting, could you give me a list of wars that were caused by religion?

This I would love to see you quantify....

You see I was of the mind that the Northern Ireland one was a geographical conflict in which the Irish wanted independence and the British wanted to remain part of the UK... I didn't realise it was because the New Testament told the catholics to commit mass murder

Religion does not "cause war". Its is an excuse for war made by people.

If there were no religion there would still be wars, and no doubt various other excuses.

There are religious people who may find justification for war in their teachings and texts, but that is not neccessarily the fault of religion. As it seems most religious texts are as open to opinion and interpretation (much the same as with any writing or form of media) there will always be those who use it for their own means or their own interpretation, for good and evil.