God and Evolution

[ecco]

No, I don't understand the difference -because there is none. It seems like you're trying to confine the definition and scope of what philosophy is and should be.

I'm not in the business of, nor do I have to mindset to, define words and phrases.

I already addressed what philosophy is. You carefully omitted it. Is that because you wanted to ignore how lexicographers define words or because you wanted to make it look like I was the one making definitions?

What are good philosophical questions?
Deep Philosophical Questions

• Will racism cease to exist?
• Why is beauty associated with morality?
• Why do we respect the dead more than the living?
• Does God have supreme power?
• Will the world be a better place if caste and religion cease to exist?
• What is the meaning of true love?

Do any of those philosophical questions look like they would be the subject of scientific studies? Polls and analysis, perhaps. But on in the same manner as a scientific study of the mechanics of black holes or quarks.

What you seem to want, is for philosophy to be an outdated, pre-science subject that no longer serves a purpose aside from a subject in history books...

What you are demonstrating is either an inability to understand what I actually wrote or a need to intentionally mischaracterize what I wrote. It either case, that's on you, not on me.

I never said or implied that philosophy is "an outdated, pre-science subject that no longer serves a purpose aside from a subject in history books".

Also, what is "intellectual curiosity"?

You are on a forum. I would think you have access to Google:

"intellectual curiosity" About 1,020,000 results (0.59 seconds)​

 

[ecco]

Philosophy is not in competition with science, and science is not in competition with philosophy.

Are you trying to imply that that is my position? Again, you demonstrate a desire to intentionally mischaracterize what I wrote.

Twenty five hundred years ago "science" had not yet been formulated. During the past 500 years, it has. In case you didn't notice, science and philosophy are now separate and distinct.

I shouldn't have to explain to you that "separate and distinct" is not the same as "in competition with". Aeronautics and biology are separate and distinct. They are not in competition with each other.

I know you like the phrase "intellectual curiosity", so I guess from now on, when speaking with you, I will replace the word philosophy with "intellectual curiosity" and then you'll get my points.

It's "Intellectual Curiatism".

Your need to post embarrassed smilies says more than your words.

 

[Cooky]

@ecco, you do know that philosophical hypothesis are proposed in the field of metaphysics all the time.

...Would that **** you off if those hypothesis were demonstrated using the scientific method and became established scientific theories?

...Or would that be preposterous to begin with, in your opinion, since philosophical thought in science is always woo?

 

[Cooky]

...Because someone who rejects or dismisses well established science actually becomes the one espousing psuedoscience (woo) then.

I'm genuinely curious where you would stand.

 

[ecco]

@ecco, you do know that philosophical hypothesis are proposed in the field of metaphysics all the time.

...Would that **** you off if those hypothesis were demonstrated using the scientific method and became established scientific theories?

...Or would that be preposterous to begin with, in your opinion, since philosophical thought in science is always woo?

Some examples from the past 100 years would be good.

 

[YoursTrue]

It seems to be a popular trend that people who believe in God do not believe in evolution. And people who believe in evolution do not believe in God.

Obviously, there's exceptions because I am one. I believe in God and evolution. As a Muslim who believes the Quran to be true there are several scripture to support this.

It also says we come from the clay of the Earth just as Christians and Jews believe.

So if science proves we are made up of stardust and God says the same thing why do so many think otherwise?

Everything science has discovered about existence dating back to the big bang is also verifiable in the Quran.

I'm not trying to revert everyone to Islam here.. Just want to know if you believe in one and not the other then just your reason behind it.

I understand your points, but because the Bible says that Adam came from the ground (soil), what reason does that allow for evolution? Thanks.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I understand your points, but because the Bible says that Adam came from the ground (soil), what reason does that allow for evolution? Thanks.

Why would the Bible need to "allow for evolution"?

 

[Ellen Brown]

I understand your points, but because the Bible says that Adam came from the ground (soil), what reason does that allow for evolution? Thanks.

It's a mix isn't it? It seems most reasonable to me that the Creator "used" something that looked like evolution. Perhaps this day to create man was actually an epoch and that is a day to God? The devout fundamentalist folk I was with when I was young were so narrow minded and rigid in their ways that mercy and humanity often got left out. It took me a long, long time to begin to address the truth that God put before me and at times I'm not very good at it.

 

[Milton Platt]

It seems to be a popular trend that people who believe in God do not believe in evolution. And people who believe in evolution do not believe in God.

Obviously, there's exceptions because I am one. I believe in God and evolution. As a Muslim who believes the Quran to be true there are several scripture to support this.

It also says we come from the clay of the Earth just as Christians and Jews believe.

So if science proves we are made up of stardust and God says the same thing why do so many think otherwise?

Everything science has discovered about existence dating back to the big bang is also verifiable in the Quran.

I'm not trying to revert everyone to Islam here.. Just want to know if you believe in one and not the other then just your reason behind it.

Saying someone i made of clay and saying one is made from elements formed in the stars are two different statements.
There is nothing in the Quran that could not be known by the primitive people who spawned it, same for the Bible. Reinterpreting it after the fact to say it represents one scientific fact or another is baloney. If you find an equation for, say, the theory of general relativity, or a mathematical explanation for the motion of the galaxies in your book, let me know. that would be interesting.

 

[exchemist]

I understand your points, but because the Bible says that Adam came from the ground (soil), what reason does that allow for evolution? Thanks.

Adam, like all life, came from inorganic compounds on the primitive Earth, in effect, from the ground.

The means by which this took place was, first of all, the processes of abiogenesis (which we do not yet fully understand) and then those of evolution (for which we now have a fairly good understanding).

 

[paarsurrey]

It seems to be a popular trend that people who believe in God do not believe in evolution. And people who believe in evolution do not believe in God.

Obviously, there's exceptions because I am one. I believe in God and evolution. As a Muslim who believes the Quran to be true there are several scripture to support this.

It also says we come from the clay of the Earth just as Christians and Jews believe.

So if science proves we are made up of stardust and God says the same thing why do so many think otherwise?

Everything science has discovered about existence dating back to the big bang is also verifiable in the Quran.

I'm not trying to revert everyone to Islam here.. Just want to know if you believe in one and not the other then just your reason behind it.

I understand God evolved everything under a process set by Him. Right, please?
Regards

 

[YoursTrue]

Adam, like all life, came from inorganic compounds on the primitive Earth, in effect, from the ground.

The means by which this took place was, first of all, the processes of abiogenesis (which we do not yet fully understand) and then those of evolution (for which we now have a fairly good understanding).

So you believe that humans evolved from other primates over a period of millions of years?

 

[YoursTrue]

Adam, like all life, came from inorganic compounds on the primitive Earth, in effect, from the ground.

The means by which this took place was, first of all, the processes of abiogenesis (which we do not yet fully understand) and then those of evolution (for which we now have a fairly good understanding).

According to what I understand of the speculation of abiogenesis, it could have happened from one bubble type unicell emerging from chemicals in water, somehow fusing with energy to make it move (evolve).

 

[Subduction Zone]

So you believe that humans evolved from other primates over a period of millions of years?

Know, not believe. There is a difference. People that believe the Adam and Eve myth only have belief. They cannot rationally defend that concept.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So you believe that humans evolved from other primates over a period of millions of years?

Know, not believe. There is a difference. People that believe the Adam and Eve myth only have belief. They cannot rationally defend that concept.

 

[paarsurrey]

Know, not believe. There is a difference. People that believe the Adam and Eve myth only have belief. They cannot rationally defend that concept.

I understand that Adam and Eve were not the first human beings but got evolved in millions of years under a process set by God. Adam was the first human being who got Word of Revelation from God. Right, please?
Regards

 

[exchemist]

So you believe that humans evolved from other primates over a period of millions of years?

Obviously. I am not scientifically illiterate.

 

[exchemist]

According to what I understand of the speculation of abiogenesis, it could have happened from one bubble type unicell emerging from chemicals in water, somehow fusing with energy to make it move (evolve).

Not really. "Fusing with energy" does not make much sense as a scientific statement.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I understand that Adam and Eve were not the first human beings but got evolved in millions of years under a process set by God. Adam was the first human being who got Word of Revelation from God. Right, please?
Regards

That is belief and not knowledge. Why believe that? The Bible clearly does not say that or imply it. Your reasoning probably amounts to "it has to be true for my religious beliefs to be true". That would not be an example of rational thought.

 

[paarsurrey]

That is belief and not knowledge. Why believe that? The Bible clearly does not say that or imply it. Your reasoning probably amounts to "it has to be true for my religious beliefs to be true". That would not be an example of rational thought.

My understanding/knowledge is from Quran and science and it is reasonable. Right, please?
Regards