Where does the survival instinct come from?

[disneyboy20022]

I believe one answer involves The eye of the tiger and a rock band

[Lazario]

That's pure cheddar right there.

[Dr Frankenollie]

There is a significant portion of the human population who are entirely unnecessary. A good portion of that portion waste our resources and spend the most significant portion of their lives supporting and preaching something that will literally help bring about the end of everyone who do make a difference and everyone their actions resonate upon and everything everyone hold dear.

[The_Iceflash]

I think this pretty much says it all:

I HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT EVERY SINGLE THING YOU JUST WROTE ABOUT AND IT MADE ME SUICIDAL.

Without religion, some people just can't cope. Sorry, of course, Duster. But you said it. Of course, I'll take some of the heat off you and drop the bomb I'm not sure anyone else has yet in the Religion Threads:

There is a significant portion of the human population who are entirely unnecessary. A good portion of that portion waste our resources and spend the most significant portion of their lives supporting and preaching something that will literally help bring about the end of everyone who do make a difference and everyone their actions resonate upon and everything everyone hold dear.

People use different things to cope and for support and guidance in life and to turn their lives around. Should we wrong people for turning to religion for it? Seeing how there are plenty of self-destructive ways for people to deal with life's problems and (in before someone calls religion self-destructive ) and find support and guidance from the wrong places, religion isn't such a bad place for someone to turn to. I don't get why all this attention and energy is being put into something that is generally a very positive thing and has done a lot of good for people. It's not the religions that cause problems in this world. It's the people who do bad things in their name. The hate is misguided.

[Lazario]

People use different things to cope and for support and guidance in life and to turn their lives around. Should we wrong people for turning to religion for it? Seeing how there are plenty of self-destructive ways for people to deal with life's problems and (in before someone calls religion self-destructive ) and find support and guidance from the wrong places, religion isn't such a bad place for someone to turn to.

I'm sorry, I don't think you get it. Please, don't take me wrong- I'm not insulting you. You're suggesting that alcohol, drug, and sexual abuse are coping mechanisms. But people know the people who indulge in those things aren't actually coping. They're avoiding coping. You're misrepresenting this situation to say that bad choices are actually valued in this society or offered in the same bin with religion but it's up to people to sort through the pile to find the right choices. That's just flat-out wrong. People are still shamed and disrespected for turning into drunks, addicts, and - for lack of a better phrase - lecherous cheaters. There are all kinds of social penalties for self-destructive behavior. Don't make it out like nobody cares about morals anymore BUT the religious. That's not true and if you don't know that, you don't understand what you're saying.

I don't get why all this attention and energy is being put into something that is generally a very positive thing and has done a lot of good for people. It's not the religions that cause problems in this world. It's the people who do bad things in their name. The hate is misguided.

I think between Goliath, Frankenollie, myself, and all the stuff posters have contributed to the numerous threads about or inlcuding talk about religion- there is more than enough proof here that religion is responsible for AT LEAST as much bad as it could ever be good.

But I'll speak for myself: the bad apples ruin it for everyone else. Of course, there's also one thing that always bugs me. Religion is a Private Thing. It's about a person's relationship to a spiritual world and this ain't a Disney Ride- it's not something more than one person can board or a trip they can take at the same time together. Any other feeling on that is a delusion. A person dies alone and their spiritual "salvation" even in the event there is a God is THEIR business and no one else's. There is no reason for religion to be as entrenched in our culture as it is. A nation is not saved together. A group of people aren't taken along on one person's final destination. Religion is about One Person's Soul. That one person who sees the world the way nobody else does. Meaning - everyone, BUT: alone. Still alone. Now, just because one person says "well, I use my religion to love everyone and not hate or judge" does not mean they should cry victimization when people criticize the bad apples who abuse the religion. Because that's the way it goes. Religion exists to be abused. And to be used to abuse others. There is nothing but proof every day, everywhere you go.

Considering all this, shouldn't religion be kept private? Who wants a commitee of people judging their life and its' worth anyway? By an insane system of "people who are this way are superior to the people who can't be like us"???

[Super Aurora]

Considering all this, shouldn't religion be kept private? Who wants a commitee of people judging their life and its' worth anyway? By an insane system of "people who are this way are superior to the people who can't be like us"???

This is true. Look at fucking Rick Santorum, his policies and politic belief revolves all around his religious dogma. Thus making it sound more of a theocracy than a democracy/republic.


There is a damn good reason the founding father said no religion should be involved in government politics. This, currently right here, is the result and example as such.

[Dr Frankenollie]

This is true. Look at fucking Rick Santorum,

Going off-topic, but...has anyone else seen this?

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/egtaV6Pj8yI" frameborder="0"></iframe>

[Super Aurora]

This is true. Look at fucking Rick Santorum,

Going off-topic, but...has anyone else seen this?

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/egtaV6Pj8yI" frameborder="0"></iframe>

You should see the one where he compare him to Iran's Amendinnerjacket. Which is his campaign commercial. It makes Rick Perry's look cute.

[Disney Duster]

Iceflash, I've liked a lot of what you said in this thread, especially the first post.

Considering all this, shouldn't religion be kept private? Who wants a commitee of people judging their life and its' worth anyway? By an insane system of "people who are this way are superior to the people who can't be like us"???

This is true. Look at fucking Rick Santorum, his policies and politic belief revolves all around his religious dogma. Thus making it sound more of a theocracy than a democracy/republic.

It should be kept out of government, but part of religion is trying to spread the word and save people. Jesus himself went around to people trying to help and save them. That's what true Christians must do, to.

I realized that I was looking at life, my own experiences, and science, and coming up with those theories, deciding to view it in the negative way, as just what science suggested. That's what was depressing...But if I thought of God being behind it, it had more meaning, and I could view the science as just what it physically looks like when love was created from God or perhaps our souls (and our bodies physically complied with it), it's just that it looked like it only came from instincts to procreate and such, if that's all you think exists.

So this:

Yes. Of course.

...was a lie?

No. Once again you misunderstand me and I now think you do it on purpose. I am saying that yes, whether God exists will be the truth or not, but to believe it is the truth without knowing for sure is a positive choice versus a negative one.

As for your lobster, the reason you chose to use a singing lobster at all shows exactly why he is less possible than God. You chose the singing lobster because it sounds silly and hilarious, while God doesn't.

Sorry, I have to disagree there. The idea of God is just as hilarious, if not more so:

That is viewing the idea of God in the most negative and cynical light possible. Meanwhile you always negatively intended your lobster idea to be silly and funny. The lobster idea in no way will ever make sense in the way you can view the idea of God should you choose to be positive instead of negative.

It's not a "magical" way, it's a miraculous way,

Isn't that really the same thing?

No, you're choosing to ignore differences, connotations, and subtleties to suit your own negative argument.

It's a power so great, it always was, it is beyond our comprehension because we didn't always exist (unless our souls existed before and we just forgot when we were born, or some other possibility), we aren't the same as him so we can't fully understand, but we can understand just enough to get the surface of the idea as I type out now.

I'm sorry, but something isn't made definitively possible or impossible just because we don't fully understand the universe. What you're saying is like suggesting that Earth has blown up years ago and all we can see are hallucinations, because we're all flying around on distant planets with the same amount of oxygen Earth had near its surface, and justifying this because we can't fully understand or comprehend everything there is int he universe.

That's not what I was saying at all. What I was saying was that we can't fully understand God. And that we don't know everything about the universe. So why make a negative conclusion when you don't know it all?

If the universe randomly just popped into existence, with no power making it happen, that doesn't make as much sense as thinking some kind of power made that universe pop into existence. We can't fully understand the idea of some power that always existed, but at least that one makes more sense.

WHY?! Why is a universe without God more nonsensical than one with him? And why do you always simplify this down to two choices: random popping into existence, or God did it. The Big Bang may have been the end of another universe, we may be stuck in a time loop, there may be multiple universes, we may be brains in jars, or maybe something can come from nothing, and that something is not God but just the universe. Humans have been wrong before. We can be wrong again.

No, because the theories about being from another universe or being in jars are still not an end. God is the final answer of where anything at all would come from, where anything that exists, othe universes or brains in jars, would come from. That's the point I'm trying to make.

And the other point is, with all those theories, why not believe in the positive idea, and the one that also makes a lot of sense, the idea of something that made and evolved such an amazing species as human beings, called God, that made us because he loves us and bad things happen but in the end there's a heaven. Just at least that.

By the way. when you agree with Lazario, that is one of the most evil things I could have seen. I talk more about it below.

I think this pretty much says it all:

I HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT EVERY SINGLE THING YOU JUST WROTE ABOUT AND IT MADE ME SUICIDAL.

Without religion, some people just can't cope. Sorry, of course, Duster. But you said it. Of course, I'll take some of the heat off you and drop the bomb I'm not sure anyone else has yet in the Religion Threads:

There is a significant portion of the human population who are entirely unnecessary. A good portion of that portion waste our resources and spend the most significant portion of their lives supporting and preaching something that will literally help bring about the end of everyone who do make a difference and everyone their actions resonate upon and everything everyone hold dear.

This has got to be one of the most evil things I've ever heard in my life, and it was most assuredly meant to hurt me. You think that you yourself being so wicked doesn't make a part of the population that you say is necessary? Or that Dr. Frankenollie isn't also being wicked by agreeing with it? And after I have defended both you and him to people when I didn't have to. Yet, for this bile you spewed and he agreed with, I won't think either of you are evil. I'll just continue to think as positively as I can of you. I think you've got some demons or poblems you've got to work out. Even just the problem of being too negative, not having love for all of mankind like you should. But if you're going to continue talking to me like this instead of talking civally so maybe you can become happier, I guess the best I can do is just continue to try to be as nice possible to you, even pray for you.

And I bet that either of you could view any of what I just said as negative again. What, you don't want to be the better person and try viewing it positively, which also might make you feel a little better that I'd rather help you than let you stew in bad feelings? Well I've explained myself as much I can, now I think it's just up to how you want to view it all, negative or positive. Here, I'll even say if I offended or hurt you in anyway, I'm sorry. There. An admittence of guilt. I'm trying to help not hurt, unless hurt is supposed to help, to get you to stop thinking so badly of everything. Even to save you.

[Super Aurora]

This is true. Look at fucking Rick Santorum, his policies and politic belief revolves all around his religious dogma. Thus making it sound more of a theocracy than a democracy/republic.

It should be kept out of government, but part of religion is trying to spread the word and save people.

I think that right there is why some people are seriously annoyed and get aggravated over it. It essentially saying abit subtlety, "believe in our beliefs, your aren't that great and ours are much much better. With our religion, we can "help" you."
It's very obnoxious and crammed in your throat. If people want to following Christianity, they can do so for them self. They don't need someone or anyone to "educate" or persuade them into it. Unlike 2000 and so years ago, we now have numerous communication and information access where simple research and reading is enough for the person themselves to decide.

Jesus himself went around to people trying to help and save them. That's what true Christians must do, to.

First off, jesus is a jew and went by Jewish belief. What Jesus essentially did was questions some of the laws and customs of the Jewish faith as well as nature. Basically he was a philosopher. Philosophers are well know to preaching ideas and questions about many things whether socially, biologically, politically, etc. Philosophy is the practice of questioning and conceptualizing ideas.
Socrates was no different from Jesus and did similar things that Jesus did as well including pissing off higher ups and making them feel "threaten" of his beliefs, had a huge following of disciples, ask numerous questions about all sorts of things. Though Socrates' beliefs didn't form into a religion, two other well know philosophiers did: Confucius and Siddhārtha Gautama (Buddha).

Philosophy is the forefather to religion as well as to science. Philosophy basically ask in question of something as well as trying to find ways of making of better life for society through questionable means. Science is the form of solving and finding facts. Where as religion is embracing and revolving around the concepts or ideas from philosophy.



Take this as an example

Philosophy: "What are we humans made of?"


Religion: would embrace that through ideas or concept like "souls", "spirituality", etc


Science: atoms, genetics,, mass etc. By solving and proving it factually.

[Disney Duster]

You're annoyed by it. Lots of other people are annoyed by it. But when I think the opportunity is alright, I'm going to spread the word and yes, do what is called trying "to save people", because philiosophy comparisons and your own opinion won't stop me from doing what it seems Jesus told his disciples to do. They were spreading the word and being martyred for it after he left. It was what they were supposed to do. People getting annoyed and making fun of me or even hating me are my martyrdom, sadly.

But usually I just do it if the subject of religion actually comes up. I don't go out of my way door to door or anything.

Take this as an example

Philosophy: "What are we humans made of?"


Religion: would embrace that through ideas or concept like "souls", "spirituality", etc


Science: atoms, genetics,, mass etc. By solving and proving it factually.

Well, I would say that science can also only look at what we physically are while philosophy and religion find what we non-physically/spiritually are, but even scientists sometimes use their findings to support spiritual theories like intelligent design and maybe sometimes souls and such.

[Dr Frankenollie]

No. Once again you misunderstand me and I now think you do it on purpose. I am saying that yes, whether God exists will be the truth or not, but to believe it is the truth without knowing for sure is a positive choice versus a negative one.

I did it on purpose? I didn't misunderstand you, you just contradicted yourself. If you realise that whether God exists or not will have nothing to do with what we hope for, then why are you choosing the 'positive' belief?

That is viewing the idea of God in the most negative and cynical light possible. Meanwhile you always negatively intended your lobster idea to be silly and funny. The lobster idea in no way will ever make sense in the way you can view the idea of God should you choose to be positive instead of negative.

No, you're viewing the idea of a singing lobster in a negative and cynical light. Yes, I chose it for silliness, but there are many less silly comparisons I could have made; also, I still believe the singing lobster concept is arguably more probable than the idea of God.

No, you're choosing to ignore differences, connotations, and subtleties to suit your own negative argument.

Miracles don't really happen. I think saying something is miraculous is saying something is supernatural or extraordinary, and I would define 'magical' in a similar way. But I agree, they're not exactly the same.

That's not what I was saying at all. What I was saying was that we can't fully understand God. And that we don't know everything about the universe. So why make a negative conclusion when you don't know it all?

Because positive conclusions aren't always right! And in this case, the negative conclusion is more likely.

No, because the theories about being from another universe or being in jars are still not an end. God is the final answer of where anything at all would come from, where anything that exists, othe universes or brains in jars, would come from. That's the point I'm trying to make.

GOD. IS. NOT. THE. FINAL. ANSWER. Something can't magically begin being infinitely complex like God would have to be, they have to evolve or change over time. So, if God exists, he must be the end product of something else, and is just as much of a final answer as the brain in jars theory is.

And the other point is, with all those theories, why not believe in the positive idea, and the one that also makes a lot of sense, the idea of something that made and evolved such an amazing species as human beings, called God, that made us because he loves us and bad things happen but in the end there's a heaven. Just at least that.

BECAUSE POSITIVE DOESN'T ALWAYS = CORRECT!

This has got to be one of the most evil things I've ever heard in my life, and it was most assuredly meant to hurt me.

Do you think the world revolves around you? Do you think me and Lazario are being atheists just to annoy you? Are you insane?!

You think that you yourself being so wicked doesn't make a part of the population that you say is necessary? Or that Dr. Frankenollie isn't also being wicked by agreeing with it? And after I have defended both you and him to people when I didn't have to. Yet, for this bile you spewed and he agreed with, I won't think either of you are evil. I'll just continue to think as positively as I can of you. I think you've got some demons or poblems you've got to work out. Even just the problem of being too negative, not having love for all of mankind like you should. But if you're going to continue talking to me like this instead of talking civally so maybe you can become happier, I guess the best I can do is just continue to try to be as nice possible to you, even pray for you.

I'm not speaking for Lazario, but I personally love mankind, yet this does not extend to people like Hitler, Bin Laden, the Pope and many others; how can you love all mankind? Because you're scared of going to Hell? Lazario is right - there is a huge portion of the planet that are unnecessary, and do more harm than good, sometimes knowingly. I'm not saying we should kill them all, but Lazario is stating facts.

And I bet that either of you could view any of what I just said as negative again. What, you don't want to be the better person and try viewing it positively, which also might make you feel a little better that I'd rather help you than let you stew in bad feelings? Well I've explained myself as much I can, now I think it's just up to how you want to view it all, negative or positive. Here, I'll even say if I offended or hurt you in anyway, I'm sorry. There. An admittence of guilt. I'm trying to help not hurt, unless hurt is supposed to help, to get you to stop thinking so badly of everything. Even to save you.

Okay. I'm sorry for getting angry several times. I apologise. And because you are well-meaning, I do not consider you a bad person; if what you have said is true, then you are a good person who just happens to be deluded and does bad things inadvertently. (That's meant to be a compliment, BTW. ) But looking at things positively is not always looking at things realistically; just because something sounds nice doesn't mean it's true. And with the severe lack of evidence and the high improbability of God's existence, I have to become 90% atheist, 10% agnostic.

[yamiiguy]

You're entirely correct, in my opinion. I've sat up for many nights pondering the meaning of my own existence (as you do) and life and I've came to the conclusion that everything is meaningless. Every action and every inaction is ultimately pointless. We're but a fraction of a speck on a tiny blue dot in the (relatively) infinite expanse of the universe. A universe that was originally nothing and got to the stage it is today by mere chance. Is there a portion of the human population that is "unnecessary"? Everything is unnecessary. Every species, every planet, every atom, every photon. Nothing is necessary unless you specify what it is necessary for. Sunlight is necessary for photosynthesis. The meeting of a sperm cell and egg cell is necessary for an animal to conceive. Humanity is necessary for...?

Religion is for the people that don't want to face that fact because it is a gloomy way of looking at things. The existence of a creator would give meaning to our lives, albeit one of servitude.

However, I don't believe and cannot comprehend the possibility of a higher being existing so comme ce comme ca.

[Super Aurora]

You're annoyed by it. Lots of other people are annoyed by it. But when I think the opportunity is alright, I'm going to spread the word and yes, do what is called trying "to save people",

you ignore the rest of what I said. Back then like when Paul and others went around spreading so, it was only way and means to do so. that or introduce them to texts(books) of the events to others.

Now, with advancement of the internet and other information and communication technology, the "spreading the words" ordeal isn't really necessary or need. The world is now more globalized and so people can become Christians if the choose so on their own. They don't need someone to tell them it.

For example, I didn't become a deist because some one preach to me or told me about it. I became one after reading what deism is, trying to connect how it reflect with the beliefs and understandings of the world I see, and making my own judgement and decided become one. People are not "babies". they can do things on their own when they feel so.

because philiosophy comparisons and your own opinion won't stop me from doing what it seems Jesus told his disciples to do.

I'm not stopping you anything. I'm just telling you why people get angry when Christians do what you claim should do and that you should take into consideration of the other side's viewpoint. The philosophy information was to tell you that it's not a religious thing but more of philosophical thing.

In those times, there would be philosopher(Jesus, Confucius, Siddhārtha Gautama (Buddha), Socrates, etc) and he would have a set of students(followers) or disciples. Most of what they do IS going around and spreading their beliefs and asking questions. That is the basic of philosophy.

Majority of most religion start or became out of philosophy. This is not an opinion. this is factually and historically true. Tim would tell you same thing.

They were spreading the word and being martyred for it after he left. It was what they were supposed to do.

And that's essentially what philosophers and their students do. Socrates was the same way.

People getting annoyed and making fun of me or even hating me are my martyrdom, sadly.

I wouldn't say that. Being a Martyr is a person who is killed because of their religious or other beliefs. I don't think you're dead yet lol.

But usually I just do it if the subject of religion actually comes up. I don't go out of my way door to door or anything.

That's good on your part. Cause the door to door evangelist types really annoy the fuck out of people, myself including.

Well, I would say that science can also only look at what we physically are while philosophy and religion find what we non-physically/spiritually are,

In some ways, yes. Like for example, the idea of God or any god. That won't ever possibly be able to be proven true or false since there's is no physical evidence or way to determine so. That's where stuff like that remain in Philosophy or religion. However, stuff like evolution, or how old the earth is is proven and so stuff like "Adam and Eve" or the scripture of Earth being only 10,000 years should be now be discarded, as we factually found out the answers to those. Back then human didn't have resources or technology to find that out and it was up to philosophy and latter extent religion to determine so of that.

but even scientists sometimes use their findings to support spiritual theories like intelligent design and maybe sometimes souls and such.

Where you hear such thing?

You're entirely correct, in my opinion. I've sat up for many nights pondering the meaning of my own existence (as you do) and life and I've came to the conclusion that everything is meaningless. Every action and every inaction is ultimately pointless. We're but a fraction of a speck on a tiny blue dot in the (relatively) infinite expanse of the universe. A universe that was originally nothing and got to the stage it is today by mere chance. Is there a portion of the human population that is "unnecessary"? Everything is unnecessary. Every species, every planet, every atom, every photon. Nothing is necessary unless you specify what it is necessary for. Sunlight is necessary for photosynthesis. The meeting of a sperm cell and egg cell is necessary for an animal to conceive. Humanity is necessary for...?

Religion is for the people that don't want to face that fact because it is a gloomy way of looking at things. The existence of a creator would give meaning to our lives, albeit one of servitude.

However, I don't believe and cannot comprehend the possibility of a higher being existing so comme ce comme ca.

That's very true. It goes back to what I said of the idea of God or concept of good and evil is just that, a human created concept or idea.
I chose deism because it fit perfectly of a idea of supreme neutral monotheist god and the growing advancement of science. as well as the best possible way of the two to easily co-exist each other with other much contradictions.

[Disney Duster]

No. Once again you misunderstand me and I now think you do it on purpose. I am saying that yes, whether God exists will be the truth or not, but to believe it is the truth without knowing for sure is a positive choice versus a negative one.

I did it on purpose? I didn't misunderstand you, you just contradicted yourself. If you realise that whether God exists or not will have nothing to do with what we hope for, then why are you choosing the 'positive' belief?

I guess this is one of the things you apologized about? I did not contradict myself. I can't explain it anymore than I already have. If you can't know for sure whether a loving positive God that made you, your a soul and an afterlife is real, you have a choice and the more positive choice is to believe in that.

No, you're viewing the idea of a singing lobster in a negative and cynical light. Yes, I chose it for silliness, but there are many less silly comparisons I could have made; also, I still believe the singing lobster concept is arguably more probable than the idea of God.

A powerful singing lobster that made everything is more probable than God which is no more specific than an entity, being, whatever you call it with intelligence and power beyond human's but that is closest to a human, much more than any animals or lobsters, and made said humans and everything else?

GOD. IS. NOT. THE. FINAL. ANSWER. Something can't magically begin being infinitely complex like God would have to be, they have to evolve or change over time. So, if God exists, he must be the end product of something else, and is just as much of a final answer as the brain in jars theory is.

But you do not know this for sure at all. You just think you do because even though you have a mind which can reach and understand the idea of something existing forever, you instead choose to go with only what you can physically see, the things evolving over time. And even then, didn't you realize that new matter comes into existence in a way you could call magical? At conception, or even when something is cloned, new matter is made that didn't exist before. Doesn't that just a little make you think what I said about God could be possible?

[quote="Dr Frankenollie}

This has got to be one of the most evil things I've ever heard in my life, and it was most assuredly meant to hurt me.

Do you think the world revolves around you? Do you think me and Lazario are being atheists just to annoy you? Are you insane?![/quote]
This is just your negativity and misunderstanding again. What you're saying is not what I was talking about at all. Lazario was implying I was an unecessary part of the population, and you clapped when he said it. I didn't know what to think about you two after that happened.

how can you love all mankind? Because you're scared of going to Hell?

As usual it is a combination of what I've been taught and how I feel inside. And I've decided that yes, it is best to love all of mankind, that that is one of the greatest things to do. I'm not even sure if my religion does say I have to love every single person, or all the time, or never hate some people. I'm sure you could pull a lot of quotes, but I think you'd probably find ones that seem contradicting and it all leads to "you should try to love everyone as much as you can" or something, but anyway, I sometimes even hate and love people at the same time. But love is the main feeling, the one that overrides the other.

Okay. I'm sorry for getting angry several times. I apologise. And because you are well-meaning, I do not consider you a bad person; if what you have said is true, then you are a good person who just happens to be deluded and does bad things inadvertently. (That's meant to be a compliment, BTW. ) But looking at things positively is not always looking at things realistically; just because something sounds nice doesn't mean it's true. And with the severe lack of evidence and the high improbability of God's existence, I have to become 90% atheist, 10% agnostic.

Okay, well thank you for saying sorry, too. But I don't understand how you could think I could be a bad person or that I've done bad things. I'm sure I could think of some possibilities, but I want to hear it from you, I can't reasonably understand how. I don't think you're a bad person either, but you seem to purposely (even if you don't fully realize/admit it?!) choose the most negative, bad thoughts, and you are intent on destroying religion, which includes destroying some of the most dear, happiest beliefs for people, so that is why I sometimes don't know to think of you. I'm sorry, I'm being honest. Maybe talkng about this will stop all that.

You're entirely correct, in my opinion. I've sat up for many nights pondering the meaning of my own existence (as you do) and life and I've came to the conclusion that everything is meaningless. Every action and every inaction is ultimately pointless. We're but a fraction of a speck on a tiny blue dot in the (relatively) infinite expanse of the universe. A universe that was originally nothing and got to the stage it is today by mere chance. Is there a portion of the human population that is "unnecessary"? Everything is unnecessary. Every species, every planet, every atom, every photon. Nothing is necessary unless you specify what it is necessary for. Sunlight is necessary for photosynthesis. The meeting of a sperm cell and egg cell is necessary for an animal to conceive. Humanity is necessary for...?

Religion is for the people that don't want to face that fact because it is a gloomy way of looking at things. The existence of a creator would give meaning to our lives, albeit one of servitude.

However, I don't believe and cannot comprehend the possibility of a higher being existing so comme ce comme ca.

No. Everything means something to us. It makes us happy or sad or feel alive or feel worthwhile. And spiritually, there's the belief we have a soul, and I think all the meaning there needs to be is just having meaning to a soul, and God. I know a lot of people wouldn't want to accept something that sounds as simple as that, but haven't you ever heard of appreciating what you have? You could be just not satisfied and want something grander. You say nothing has meaning, I say everything has meaning and you don't realize it because you're look for something more than that.

And as for belief in God, no the meaning he gives me is not that of servitude. The meaning he gives me is that of something greater than I feel when I view life as completely random and not made with the loving intent of God, the feeling I get that we were made because it's good and cool and joyful and amazing. And yes, also because it makes me feel greater than just the physical stuff we see, it encourages me to feel great about my mind and my emotions as part of a great soul in me that will last forever as opposed to being just physical parts that randomly came together and will disintegrate into dirt and never have mattered. That's what God means to me over these theories of things randomly happening from an explosion that wasn't made with any intent at all, just continuing on and on and calling it survival when real survival is a desire to live because you want to live, you intend to, like God intended anything, not because you're physical parts make you in their random continuing.

And I am sick of all that stuff about other galaxies and the universe being so big making people say they are insignifigant, when it means the opposite. The universe is huge...and only one one planet in it are there beings even thinking about the universe. That's amazing. That's being signifigant. Yea yea maybe there could be other life out there. Yes, but it's not proven. At least we know we exist and are thinking about existence at all.

you ignore the rest of what I said. Back then like when Paul and others went around spreading so, it was only way and means to do so. that or introduce them to texts(books) of the events to others.

Now, with advancement of the internet and other information and communication technology, the "spreading the words" ordeal isn't really necessary or need. The world is now more globalized and so people can become Christians if the choose so on their own. They don't need someone to tell them it.

I wasn't ignoring it, I was trying to say that even hearing that, we're supposed to keep reaching out to people about religion ourselves. Sure, not going around as much as they did in the past, but... Well like I said I don't go out of my way to do it. I talk about it if it comes up. That's totally fine don't you think?

It is pretty cool how you became a Deist though. Of course, you're always finding stuff on the internets. You're very good at that.

People getting annoyed and making fun of me or even hating me are my martyrdom, sadly.

I wouldn't say that. Being a Martyr is a person who is killed because of their religious or other beliefs. I don't think you're dead yet lol.

The word martyr has taken on a more general metaphoric meaning since back then...

Well, I would say that science can also only look at what we physically are while philosophy and religion find what we non-physically/spiritually are,

In some ways, yes. Like for example, the idea of God or any god. That won't ever possibly be able to be proven true or false since there's is no physical evidence or way to determine so. That's where stuff like that remain in Philosophy or religion. However, stuff like evolution, or how old the earth is is proven and so stuff like "Adam and Eve" or the scripture of Earth being only 10,000 years should be now be discarded, as we factually found out the answers to those. Back then human didn't have resources or technology to find that out and it was up to philosophy and latter extent religion to determine so of that.

Yea, that's pretty much true. But in addition I think the Adam and Eve story is not meant to be completely accurate. Maybe among the Neanderthals the first evolved people really were Adam and Eve who started original sin, who knows. As for how old the world is, perhaps they meant how old from a certain stand point, like when "people" really took off, yea I know I bet you'll tell me when scientists think the first homosapien came about but I'm just saying the kind of things they possibly meant.

but even scientists sometimes use their findings to support spiritual theories like intelligent design and maybe sometimes souls and such.

Where you hear such thing?[/quote]
Well I know some scientists believe in intelligent design because of how they figured out everything needs to be a perfect way in order for life to be as well off and sustained as it is and such, as for evidence of souls, I can't exactly remember if I heard anything like that but I think here and there I heard scientists talking about it. And I know there's quantum physics. And Einstein had theories about the afterlife.

It goes back to what I said of the idea of God or concept of good and evil is just that, a human created concept or idea.

You still don't think it's a high idea like the idea of God. Oh well...

[qindarka]

If a good portion of the world are 'unnecessary', who then are the 'necessary' ones?

[yamiiguy]

You're entirely correct, in my opinion. I've sat up for many nights pondering the meaning of my own existence (as you do) and life and I've came to the conclusion that everything is meaningless. Every action and every inaction is ultimately pointless. We're but a fraction of a speck on a tiny blue dot in the (relatively) infinite expanse of the universe. A universe that was originally nothing and got to the stage it is today by mere chance. Is there a portion of the human population that is "unnecessary"? Everything is unnecessary. Every species, every planet, every atom, every photon. Nothing is necessary unless you specify what it is necessary for. Sunlight is necessary for photosynthesis. The meeting of a sperm cell and egg cell is necessary for an animal to conceive. Humanity is necessary for...?

Religion is for the people that don't want to face that fact because it is a gloomy way of looking at things. The existence of a creator would give meaning to our lives, albeit one of servitude.

However, I don't believe and cannot comprehend the possibility of a higher being existing so comme ce comme ca.

No. Everything means something to us. It makes us happy or sad or feel alive or feel worthwhile. And spiritually, there's the belief we have a soul, and I think all the meaning there needs to be is just having meaning to a soul, and God. I know a lot of people wouldn't want to accept something that sounds as simple as that, but haven't you ever heard of appreciating what you have? You could be just not satisfied and want something grander. You say nothing has meaning, I say everything has meaning and you don't realize it because you're look for something more than that.

And as for belief in God, no the meaning he gives me is not that of servitude. The meaning he gives me is that of something greater than I feel when I view life as completely random and not made with the loving intent of God, the feeling I get that we were made because it's good and cool and joyful and amazing. And yes, also because it makes me feel greater than just the physical stuff we see, it encourages me to feel great about my mind and my emotions as part of a great soul in me that will last forever as opposed to being just physical parts that randomly came together and will disintegrate into dirt and never have mattered. That's what God means to me over these theories of things randomly happening from an explosion that wasn't made with any intent at all, just continuing on and on and calling it survival when real survival is a desire to live because you want to live, you intend to, like God intended anything, not because you're physical parts make you in their random continuing.

And I am sick of all that stuff about other galaxies and the universe being so big making people say they are insignifigant, when it means the opposite. The universe is huge...and only one one planet in it are there beings even thinking about the universe. That's amazing. That's being signifigant. Yea yea maybe there could be other life out there. Yes, but it's not proven. At least we know we exist and are thinking about existence at all.

You obviously believe in a creator so you have your meaning there. But I would say that, by default, that meaning is servitude. He might not order you to do things (though there was that big book of instructions and moral lessons...) but a creation serves the creator.

The chances of this planet being the only one to harbour life is frankly minute. We haven't found any yet but there are a multitude of explanations for that, not least that we've only really had the technology to scan the skies for around 50 years and that's a pretty insignificant length of time.

We should obviously life our lives as nature intended and conform to naive realism but because something makes us happy or sad does not give it meaning. Because, like I said, if you remove the possibility of a creator from the equation, everything exists simply because it does.

At conception, or even when something is cloned, new matter is made that didn't exist before. Doesn't that just a little make you think what I said about God could be possible?

Conception/cloning doesn't 'create new matter'. The cells absorb nutrients from the mother in order to obtain energy for processes like mitosis. They're not creating something new, just recycling particles that already exist.

[Dr Frankenollie]

I guess this is one of the things you apologized about? I did not contradict myself. I can't explain it anymore than I already have. If you can't know for sure whether a loving positive God that made you, your a soul and an afterlife is real, you have a choice and the more positive choice is to believe in that.

Actually Duster, I was apologising for the way I wrote things (e.g. in an angry, insulting way) rather than what I wrote. I still think you've contradicted yourself. Let me ask you: if you know that something being positive does not mean it's true, then why do you found your belief on a 'positive choice'? Don't blither on about how it makes you feel good, I want to know why you ignore common sense and embrace deluded happiness if you know that the most positive thing is not always the most realistic thing.

A powerful singing lobster that made everything is more probable than God which is no more specific than an entity, being, whatever you call it with intelligence and power beyond human's but that is closest to a human, much more than any animals or lobsters, and made said humans and everything else?

Here's the two theories as I see them:

1. There is an inter-dimensional lobster that exists outside our universe, and in order to shape worlds, it has evolved in order to 'sing', using the resultant waves to form universes. It is the end product of other, god-like inter-dimensional beings.

2. There is a being that always existed, is part of nature and outside nature, has infite power, immortality, the ability to read minds and knows everything that has happened, is happening and will happen.

On a scale of probability, the lobster theory just makes more sense to me. And seeing as it's a load of nonsense that I made up, it doesn't make the God theory appear very credible at all.

But you do not know this for sure at all. You just think you do because even though you have a mind which can reach and understand the idea of something existing forever, you instead choose to go with only what you can physically see, the things evolving over time. And even then, didn't you realize that new matter comes into existence in a way you could call magical? At conception, or even when something is cloned, new matter is made that didn't exist before. Doesn't that just a little make you think what I said about God could be possible?

Like yamiiguy says, conception and cloning don't create whole new matter. I don't know for a fact whether God would have been evolved, but seeing as that's how all complexity originates for all known life, I'm willing to bet that if there is a creator of some sort, it evolved from something else, something much simpler.

This is just your negativity and misunderstanding again. What you're saying is not what I was talking about at all. Lazario was implying I was an unecessary part of the population, and you clapped when he said it. I didn't know what to think about you two after that happened.

Even if the portion of the population that Lazario referred to includes you, I'm not certain if he was implying that. To clarify, by 'clapping', I did not intend to insult you.

Okay, well thank you for saying sorry, too. But I don't understand how you could think I could be a bad person or that I've done bad things. I'm sure I could think of some possibilities, but I want to hear it from you, I can't reasonably understand how. I don't think you're a bad person either, but you seem to purposely (even if you don't fully realize/admit it?!) choose the most negative, bad thoughts, and you are intent on destroying religion, which includes destroying some of the most dear, happiest beliefs for people, so that is why I sometimes don't know to think of you. I'm sorry, I'm being honest. Maybe talkng about this will stop all that.

I don't think you're necessarily a bad person, but perhaps a misled, delusional good person. If you can't understand why, it's the same reason you think you need to save me: we both consider each other's beliefs 'wrong' in some sense.

yamiiguy, you're one of the smartest people on UD. Even though I'm still wavering when it comes to determining the truth (if there is one) of the universe, whether morality is necessary, et cetera, I do agree with everything you've said on the whole. However, as tiny and insignificant as we are in comparison to the universe around us, some could take comfort in how gigantic we are in comparison to atoms, electrons, and all the tiny little pieces that make up the world around us. Really, somebody's view on whether we're tiny or enormous depends entirely on relativity and what we're being compared to.

[Super Aurora]

No. Everything means something to us. It makes us happy or sad or feel alive or feel worthwhile.

Yes, to us. But not from objective viewpoint from reality. Two big differences.

but haven't you ever heard of appreciating what you have? You could be just not satisfied and want something grander.

We can still appreciate things and still accept or acknowledge the facts of reality is.

You say nothing has meaning, I say everything has meaning and you don't realize it because you're look for something more than that.

You're missing Yamiiguy's point. What Yamiiguy saying is that, when you take the moment to look out of the box and detach yourself from any personal bias or beliefs you hold dear for yourself, that essentially what it is.

of course in some sense something has meaning as in a purpose. Such like why do we have sex, to reproduce(and pleasure) or why do need chameleons have long tongue- to enable them to catch their food. etc

But what Yamii Guy saying is that when you look at in overall grand scheme of things for how significant are these actions and purposes we do, they come off very little to nothing. We go to war, we work, we do whatever. But in the long run of things is it's purpose is presentable to anything outside of our planet? do it affect the sun, the galaxy, universe? Does the actions going on inside one fraction of a speck(earth) contribute anything, of real value? Does it help the galaxy or universe or what ever in anyway? not really.

We do the things we do because it is in our nature of doing things. We live and die like anything else. we are no higher or significant than anything else.

And as for belief in God, no the meaning he gives me is not that of servitude.

If you want to get technical, especially from the old testament, God basically is implying you be in his servitude. Other wise why else would he present laws and statement he expect you to abide by? When you have a ruler and a subject, the subject serves the ruler. it's how it works. Doesn't matter whether he's "good and kind" or "evil".

The meaning he gives me is that of something greater than I feel when I view life as completely random and not made with the loving intent of God, the feeling I get that we were made because it's good and cool and joyful and amazing. And yes, also because it makes me feel greater than just the physical stuff we see, it encourages me to feel great about my mind and my emotions as part of a great soul in me that will last forever as opposed to being just physical parts that randomly came together and will disintegrate into dirt and never have mattered.

What you feel emotionally and mentally, doesn't always means it's the reality. Hate to break that for you.

That's what God means to me over these theories of things randomly happening from an explosion that wasn't made with any intent at all, just continuing on and on and calling it survival

LOL WAT? Those theories of Universe origins have in no way anything to do with survival. lol wtf are you even saying? It sounds like you really have no clue what we been saying.

when real survival is a desire to live because you want to live, you intend to, like God intended anything, not because you're physical parts make you in their random continuing.

Wanting to live is part of our nature just like any other living creature. That IS part of our survival nature.

And wtf up with your random continuing BS? Not happens "randomly" in life. I dunno wtf you saying on that.

And I am sick of all that stuff about other galaxies and the universe being so big making people say they are insignificant, when it means the opposite.

You're "sick" or it because you don't want to accept it and that it ruins your perception of how you see the world. It's just like how creationist don't want to accept to fact that evolution and existence of dinosaurs to be true because it debunk their "beliefs" or perception of how they thought to be our origins and such.

It's call being delusional.
It's essentially why many of us here call you delusional.

The universe is huge...and only one one planet in it are there beings even thinking about the universe. That's amazing. That's being significant.

One planet so far of we know of(since it's the only one we are use to and aware of.), but you realize that universe is made up of BILLIONS, not hundreds or thousands, but BILLIONS of galaxies in which those galaxies in encompass BILLIONS and Billions of systems in which also would mean it have trillions of planets? All of this stretching BILLIONS and BILLIONS of light years (remember light is fastest thing known to us so far in the universe.)

Not to mention that galaxies can merge into other galaxies (without causing any effect of it like planet/stars crashing into each other.) Show just out vast and massive space in a galaxy alone is.

I'll let this show you how small we really are(and this is just stars and planets):

<iframe width="640" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/QGtCslmc_EY" frameborder="0"></iframe>

or here for better view of it:

<iframe width="640" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/7NYRVsKAkFM" frameborder="0"></iframe>

Likely than not there are other high level life forms out there. You gotta be delusional to think otherwise.

Yea yea maybe there could be other life out there. Yes, but it's not proven. At least we know we exist and are thinking about existence at all.

Yet we find out new things almost every time. Did you know scientist recently discover about over a hundred planets that are just like Earths?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... weeks.html (dailymail isn't best source but there is other news on it, so it is true news)

here's one: http://news.cnet.com/8301-19514_3-57337 ... able-zone/
And that one is even in same zone distance from it's star which its star is roughly same as our Sun.

and

Also before people thought a two-suns(star) solar system, like in star wars, wasn't possible (due to magnetization pull possibly ripping apart stars and planets) Yet recently they discovered that such thing does exist.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 133946.htm

[Lazario]

If a good portion of the world are 'unnecessary', who then are the 'necessary' ones?

What's your point?