Where did good come from? (hell, verse, doctrine, originate)

[c'est la vie]

Originally Posted by Fullback32

Natural selection = reproductive success
Sociocultural evolution = how societies and cultures develop over time

Two different things.

Why is this so hard to comprehend?

The only societies that develop are those in which individuals successfully reproduce, no?

If man has evolved biologically, how can you say that any behavior is not a result of that which has evolved?

Why not simply admit that one naturally follows the other?

[c'est la vie]

Originally Posted by Roxolan

If you want to "survive natural selection", the important thing is that your genes survive.

This does means protecting yourself, up to a point. If you're dead, you can't reproduce, and can't do any of the other things below. (It also means being attractive to the other gender. Enough said.)

It means protecting your children, because they carry your genetic information. It's also important, though slightly less so, to protect your close familly. Their genetic information is fairly similar to your own.

But many species, including our own, go one step further and protect the whole tribe/group/pack. After all, in a pack, all members are more or less related. Besides, you have more chances to survive if you're surrounded by friendly pack members than if you're alone and in a cutthroat competition.

Allow me to add that your understanding of the theory of evolution is extremely poor, and that your sarcasm isn't doing much for other people's willingness to educate you. Stop being so antagonistic, and you'll learn better.

Unfortunately for you, evolution is 'purposeless'.

That is, it is not a 'thinking' process. It doesn't not plan to achieve an end.

[cleatis]

Originally Posted by *sherry*

According to evolutionist we were once "wild" people....survival of the fittest...so, this, naturally would explain why people are not so nice. But if we came about as the "big bang" theorist say...then where did good come from?

First I think you need to define good. The problem with good is that it is more or less subjective. Good to one is very often not good to another. And if good cannot be universal, it can't be objective. Good is based on how it makes an individual feel. In nature, there just is. There aren't good and bad things there are just things that make us feel good or bad.

Part of the problem with this is the definition of good. Ice cream is good but so is heroin. The main problem is that the reactions and repercussions of good things are not always good - the whole equal and opposite reaction thing. A comfortable pair of shoes is good, but what if they're made in a sweat shop? You might stop someone from shoplifting baby formula, but what if they couldn't afford it and the baby might starve? This series of trade offs goes with every things that is good or bad. So at best, the ideal of good and bad, is trying to isolate what we deem to be good or bad from what simply is.

[nightflight]

Originally Posted by c'est la vie

from evolutionist definition | Dictionary.com

[SIZE=4]ev⋅o⋅lu⋅tion⋅ist[/SIZE]  /ˌɛvəˈluʃənɪst or, especially Brit., ˌivə-/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ev-uh-loo-shuh-nist or, especially Brit., ee-vuh-] Show IPA

Use evolutionist in a Sentence

–noun 1.a person who believes in or supports a theory of evolution, esp. in biology.





from define:evolutionist - Google Search


Definitions of evolutionist on the Web:

• a person who believes in organic evolution
  wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Its the "as if" factor. As if evolution was something debatable. The fact that there is a word such as "evolutionist" is tragic.

[ElizaTeal]

Originally Posted by Nikk

evolution never happened.

There is none good but God.

Your religious belief and your religious opinion is not a fact and shouldn't be stayed as such.

[c'est la vie]

Originally Posted by nightflight

Its the "as if" factor. As if evolution was something debatable. The fact that there is a word such as "evolutionist" is tragic.

Not everyone has the great faith that you have.

Some of us doubt, and are of a skeptical mind.

[nightflight]

Originally Posted by c'est la vie

Not everyone has the great faith that you have.

Some of us doubt, and are of a skeptical mind.

Some are and some who claim to be are deceived. For example, people who accept creationism.

[c'est la vie]

Originally Posted by nightflight

Some are and some who claim to be are deceived. For example, people who accept creationism.

So build us up in faith by telling us again how a member of one species can give birth to a member of a brand new species.

And how that one and only member is gonna find a mate of his own species to extend the family line of the new species beyond 1 member.

It does take two to tango, does it not?

[nightflight]

Originally Posted by c'est la vie

So build us up in faith by telling us again how a member of one species can give birth to a member of a brand new species.

And how that one and only member is gonna find a mate of his own species to extend the family line of the new species beyond 1 member.

It does take two to tango, does it not?

Ah, you are right. It really was just dirt+magic.

If you really want to understand biological evolution, there is a wealth of material out there. If you really want to understand. Somehow, I don't think you do.

[Eresh]

Originally Posted by c'est la vie

And how that one and only member is gonna find a mate of his own species to extend the family line of the new species beyond 1 member.

It does take two to tango, does it not?

This is a very common misconception that people have about evolution.
Individuals do NOT evolve. Populations evolve.

If you (I don't mean you specifically) wish to succesfully debate a topic, then you need to properly understand what you are debating against. Otherwise you just come out seeming foolish.
Unfortunately, I don't foresee this happening with evolution, because once people understand it correctly, they realize there's nothing to debate.