NationStates

Geneviev wrote:-snip-

I don't doubt that religion has positive effects, and I'd wager likely more benefits come from the more moderate (yet not to the point of 'casual') versions than the fundamentalist ones. Even though I don't believe in religions, I can't honestly say that there wouldn't be a huge sense of purpose and belonging in being the creation of a deity and the entire point of the cosmos itself.

The whole objective-vs-subjective thing is for a different thread, but I respect your point on that too, even if I disagree.

I'd also oppose the assertion that religion is a plague. It's like any part of human life - it has goods bits and bad bits. We just need to keep working at fostering and keeping the good bits, and avoiding the bad bits. Great evil has been done in the name of gods, but so has a lot of good.

Albrenia wrote:

Geneviev wrote:-snip-

I don't doubt that religion has positive effects, and I'd wager likely more benefits come from the more moderate (yet not to the point of 'casual') versions than the fundamentalist ones. Even though I don't believe in religions, I can't honestly say that there wouldn't be a huge sense of purpose and belonging in being the creation of a deity and the entire point of the cosmos itself.

The whole objective-vs-subjective thing is for a different thread, but I respect your point on that too, even if I disagree.

I'd also oppose the assertion that religion is a plague. It's like any part of human life - it has goods bits and bad bits. We just need to keep working at fostering and keeping the good bits, and avoiding the bad bits. Great evil has been done in the name of gods, but so has a lot of good.

Religion served purposes throughout history, motivating cultural development and fostering academic progress. I daresay now it is more of a hindrance than a help, if only because we have begun to outgrow it.

Do you folks believe in space aliens?

I do, but I find it unlikely that they've visited Earth. Most likely the vast majority of them are microscopic lifeforms spread across the universe.

Albrenia wrote:Do you folks believe in space aliens?

I do, but I find it unlikely that they've visited Earth. Most likely the vast majority of them are microscopic lifeforms spread across the universe.

Watch out, the mods might interpret that as threadjacking. I wouldn't start that debate on this thread.

The New California Republic wrote:

Albrenia wrote:Do you folks believe in space aliens?

I do, but I find it unlikely that they've visited Earth. Most likely the vast majority of them are microscopic lifeforms spread across the universe.

Watch out, the mods might interpret that as threadjacking. I wouldn't start that debate on this thread.

Ah, ok. Consider the question revoked then. Although I thought belief or non-belief in aliens would be similar enough to belief or non-belief in Gods to count.

Thanks for the head's up.

Back on topic... hmm... has anyone here heard of any reasonable responses to how poorly designed we are, if we are indeed 'intelligently' designed?

Albrenia wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:Watch out, the mods might interpret that as threadjacking. I wouldn't start that debate on this thread.

Ah, ok. Consider the question revoked then. Although I thought belief or non-belief in aliens would be similar enough to belief or non-belief in Gods to count.

Thanks for the head's up.

Back on topic... hmm... has anyone here heard of any reasonable responses to how poorly designed we are, if we are indeed 'intelligently' designed?

I'd say humans are fairly well designed.
Evolution has a tendency to do a pretty good job, but sometimes things slip through. But if it doesn't negatively affect how fit you are, it doesn't really need to change.

Valgora wrote:

Albrenia wrote:
Ah, ok. Consider the question revoked then. Although I thought belief or non-belief in aliens would be similar enough to belief or non-belief in Gods to count.

Thanks for the head's up.

Back on topic... hmm... has anyone here heard of any reasonable responses to how poorly designed we are, if we are indeed 'intelligently' designed?

I'd say humans are fairly well designed.
Evolution has a tendency to do a pretty good job, but sometimes things slip through. But if it doesn't negatively affect how fit you are, it doesn't really need to change.

Evolution is very good at doing 'good enough', but it's not always particularly sensible. Eating with our breathing-hole, for example, is extremely poor planning if designed from scratch.

Albrenia wrote:

Valgora wrote:I'd say humans are fairly well designed.
Evolution has a tendency to do a pretty good job, but sometimes things slip through. But if it doesn't negatively affect how fit you are, it doesn't really need to change.

Evolution is very good at doing 'good enough', but it's not always particularly sensible. Eating with our breathing-hole, for example, is extremely poor planning if designed from scratch.

We have two breathing holes.
But we also have a flap-thingy to stop food from going to where air is supposed to go.

Albrenia wrote:Do you folks believe in space aliens?

I do, but I find it unlikely that they've visited Earth. Most likely the vast majority of them are microscopic lifeforms spread across the universe.

Not belief, but I do believe its probabilistically likely that advanced alien life does exist. It always elicits amusement from me whenever someone suggests that the kami are aliens, like Ancient Aliens did (although an alien could be a kami, to be fair).

Reikoku wrote:

Albrenia wrote:Do you folks believe in space aliens?

I do, but I find it unlikely that they've visited Earth. Most likely the vast majority of them are microscopic lifeforms spread across the universe.

Not belief, but I do believe its probabilistically likely that advanced alien life does exist. It always elicits amusement from me whenever someone suggests that the kami are aliens, like Ancient Aliens did (although an alien could be a kami, to be fair).

In my opinion I think we are, and likely will be the most advanced species in the universe.

United Imperial Systems wrote:

Reikoku wrote:
Not belief, but I do believe its probabilistically likely that advanced alien life does exist. It always elicits amusement from me whenever someone suggests that the kami are aliens, like Ancient Aliens did (although an alien could be a kami, to be fair).

In my opinion I think we are, and likely will be the most advanced species in the universe.

I know someone who won't be thanked for all the fish.

Valgora wrote:

Albrenia wrote:
Evolution is very good at doing 'good enough', but it's not always particularly sensible. Eating with our breathing-hole, for example, is extremely poor planning if designed from scratch.

We have two breathing holes.
But we also have a flap-thingy to stop food from going to where air is supposed to go.

True, but because the two holes are connected, it is possible to block the breathing hole with food causing people to choke. If instead the two where entirely not connected (ie it was impossible to choke on food) that would be a much more sensible design. The two connected pipes with the flap that blocks the food from going down the breathing hole is good enough, it isn't a good design.

Neutraligon wrote:

Valgora wrote:We have two breathing holes.
But we also have a flap-thingy to stop food from going to where air is supposed to go.

True, but because the two holes are connected, it is possible to block the breathing hole with food causing people to choke. If instead the two where entirely not connected (ie it was impossible to choke on food) that would be a much more sensible design. The two connected pipes with the flap that blocks the food from going down the breathing hole is good enough, it isn't a good design.

That's nothing. Our DNA repair mechanisms are very prone to introducing errors, which can lead to cell malfunction and cancer. For example, in the case of a "double strand break", the DNA repair mechanism basically takes a wild guess as to what base pairs are missing, and just throws anything in there to seal the gap. That kind of shit is very dangerous, and can drastically change the behaviour of the cell and lead to cancer.

Also, before DNA transcription can take place, there is an added step required to remove introns, so called "junk DNA" that do not code for proteins. Again, the mechanisms to do that can also fail, and lead to behavioural changes in the cell, and possibly cancer.

I cannot believe that a God would be so damn clueless to make those two easily avoidable mistakes, creating basic cellular mechanisms that are prone to failure. If he intentionally put those flaws in on purpose, then God is a monster that is totally undeserving of our worship.

As a product of evolution, we're amazing. As a product of intelligent design, we're... sub-par.

Albrenia wrote:As a product of evolution, we're amazing. As a product of intelligent design, we're... sub-par.

This.

Ascribing intent to the process cheapens it immeasurably.

The New California Republic wrote:

Neutraligon wrote:True, but because the two holes are connected, it is possible to block the breathing hole with food causing people to choke. If instead the two where entirely not connected (ie it was impossible to choke on food) that would be a much more sensible design. The two connected pipes with the flap that blocks the food from going down the breathing hole is good enough, it isn't a good design.

That's nothing. Our DNA repair mechanisms are very prone to introducing errors, which can lead to cell malfunction and cancer. For example, in the case of a "double strand break", the DNA repair mechanism basically takes a wild guess as to what base pairs are missing, and just throws anything in there to seal the gap. That kind of shit is very dangerous, and can drastically change the behaviour of the cell and lead to cancer.

Also, before DNA transcription can take place, there is an added step required to remove introns, so called "junk DNA" that do not code for proteins. Again, the mechanisms to do that can also fail, and lead to behavioural changes in the cell, and possibly cancer.

I cannot believe that a God would be so damn clueless to make those two easily avoidable mistakes, creating basic cellular mechanisms that are prone to failure. If he intentionally put those flaws in on purpose, then God is a monster that is totally undeserving of our worship.

Evolution: where ‘whoops!’ is the ultimate sign of progress.

And I am fine with that.

Where's apatheist on the poll?

MURICA- wrote:Where's apatheist on the poll?

Nobody cared enough to include it.

The Liberated Territories wrote:

MURICA- wrote:Where's apatheist on the poll?

Nobody cared enough to include it.

I see what you did there...

Epistevism, as defined by Aron Ra, is quite nice. I don't 'believe' anything. There are things I know, and things I don't know. Anything else is speculation not worth my time if there's no ability to prove it.

Zakuvia wrote:Epistevism, as defined by Aron Ra, is quite nice. I don't 'believe' anything. There are things I know, and things I don't know. Anything else is speculation not worth my time if there's no ability to prove it.

What are the principles of ethics?

Philjia wrote:

Zakuvia wrote:Epistevism, as defined by Aron Ra, is quite nice. I don't 'believe' anything. There are things I know, and things I don't know. Anything else is speculation not worth my time if there's no ability to prove it.

What are the principles of ethics?

I guess they're unimportant to Epistevians?

MURICA- wrote:

The Liberated Territories wrote:
Nobody cared enough to include it.

I see what you did there...

Pun aside, it was a term Bill Maher termed, yeah? And, who really cares about Bill Maher...

Zakuvia wrote:Epistevism, as defined by Aron Ra, is quite nice. I don't 'believe' anything. There are things I know, and things I don't know. Anything else is speculation not worth my time if there's no ability to prove it.

How does that work? Any amount of future planning requires at least some measure of speculation

Neutraligon wrote:

Valgora wrote:We have two breathing holes.
But we also have a flap-thingy to stop food from going to where air is supposed to go.

True, but because the two holes are connected, it is possible to block the breathing hole with food causing people to choke. If instead the two where entirely not connected (ie it was impossible to choke on food) that would be a much more sensible design. The two connected pipes with the flap that blocks the food from going down the breathing hole is good enough, it isn't a good design.

You’re joking right? If the oesophagus was split into two pipes you’d need two mouths and two noses. If the tube to the lung just connected to the nose, then we would be unable to speak, because it is the action of the tongue and teeth which allow control of speech. Likewise if the tube to the stomach connected just to the mouth, we’d be unable to taste because the nose is pertinent in our ability to taste. If the tube just connected to the nose if it became blocked say during a cold, you’d suffocate. The problem of two tubes does not stop an allergic reactions because the type 1 sensitivity would cause the oesophagus regardless of connection the mouth to inflame. So two oesophagus would not solve this problem.

There are no issues with the system we have, the reason people choke is because they abuse that system: not chewing before swallowing, eating too quickly. Yet most humans swallow millions maybe billions of times across a life time, yet how many times do we choke in our life? For the sheer volume of humans, the sheer volume going through the throat and the sheer use of the system there are very few failures of that system, it has a lower rate of failure than than the most carefully constructed human system.