Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Famed Harvard Biologist Gould Dies
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&ncid=716&e=2&u=/ap/20020520/ap_on_re_us/obit_gould ^ | 5/20/02 | yahoo

Posted on 05/20/2002 12:53:27 PM PDT by rpage3

See source for details....


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: crevolist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 361-380381-400401-420 ... 961-966 next last
To: Gurn
he punishes those who take other gods before him

And their children to the third and fourth generation. If he were a human we'd all agree he was some sort of sick freak.

381 posted on 05/21/2002 9:04:51 AM PDT by jlogajan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 374 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
Inquiring minds want to know.

The existence of a real Adam and a real Eve is regarded as a necessary logical inference from the doctrine from Tradition of Original Sin. Catholics are also required to believe in "Creation from nothing." Other than that, the Catholic Church doesn't hold as doctrine any scientific position regarding human origins. Science and Faith/Morals are separate categories.

382 posted on 05/21/2002 9:05:22 AM PDT by Aquinasfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 358 | View Replies]

To: Junior
Suppose someone simply feels indifferent toward Him?

Rev 3:16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

383 posted on 05/21/2002 9:05:33 AM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 355 | View Replies]

To: Mortin Sult
...occasional cataclysmic catastrophe has ample evidence that no one could miss except some determined to deny it beforehand.

I don't see any evidence in this statement. Unsupported assertions are not science, and your thinly veiled condescending tone ("evidence that no one could miss") does not serve you well. Perhaps you would like to try again?

384 posted on 05/21/2002 9:05:47 AM PDT by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 378 | View Replies]

To: Gladwin
Morality is a form of cooperation, but it evolved to help individual groups of humans. It can be applied between groups of humans, but that is not required.

In a universe governed solely by the mechanisms of random evolution, cooperation is both an evolved behavior, and also an engine of evolution. You're probably correct that in such cases "morality" is definable only in terms of how one adheres to the evolved methods of cooperation.

And you're probably also correct that cooperation is not a strict evolutionary requirement, nor are the means or goals of cooperation constant -- which says that morality is only a relative concept, grounded in random mutation.

But note that in saying this, one must surrender any means of differentiating between right and wrong, except perhaps for the strict utilitarian criteria embodied in evolutionary theory. From that perspective, the only thing wrong with Soviet Communism was that it didn't work. The present Chinese tyranny cannot be morally condemned, because it has yet to fail.

By the same token, Athenian democracy is morally inferior to Spartan despotism, as history shows the latter to have been far more successful than the former.

Morality, in humans, only seems to apply to the group that you are in.

That is a false statement -- Christian morality, for example, teaches precisely the opposite idea, even if the practice sometimes falls short.

Be that as it may, your postulated morality does allow one to express a preference for a particular outcome -- indeed, "cooperation" implies that a group of people can share and pursue a common preferred result.

But again, this does not translate into any universal concept of right or wrong. Indeed, this approach basically denies the possibility of "unalienable rights," especially for individuals; not to mention any pretense to standards of proper behavior.

This highlights the severe logical difficulty underlying the philosophy of, say, Ayn Rand and her libertarian followers here on FR, who quite vocally claim to have access to a set of absolute moral principles.

Gould's contribution to the fray was in putting forth an attractive (if ultimately indefensible) case for an atheistic view of evolution, the logical end of which we have addressed above. It's interesting, therefore, that many of the people who lionize his scientific positions on threads like this one, are the same ones who loudly complain about the practical results of his theory on political threads.

385 posted on 05/21/2002 9:05:59 AM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]

To: JediGirl
The truth of his "punctuated equilibrium."

I should have said the truth of the lie of his punctuated equilibrium. Gould looked at the fossil record, realized that the evidence contradicted classical evolutionary theory, but instead of questioning the theory, he simply came up with a twist on the theory which explained the seeming gaps in the fossil record. Can anyone prove that punctuated equilibrium isn't a total fabrication? Gould, like all evolutionists, hold to evolution as gospel, and promote it with evangelistic fervor, which is why I say that evolution isn't science (it can't be observed or replicated in the laboratory), but is ideology. It's their religion. To believe in evolution requires certain leaps of faith.

386 posted on 05/21/2002 9:06:05 AM PDT by My2Cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 313 | View Replies]

To: Junior
Gone into lawyer mode again, have you?

Logical Ad Hominem.

387 posted on 05/21/2002 9:06:54 AM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 371 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan
Other than that, the Catholic Church doesn't hold as doctrine any scientific position regarding human origins. Science and Faith/Morals are separate categories.

When was the last time you attended Catholic school? They ALL teach evolution which deals directly with human origins. As I have cleary demonstrated, you can't separate the bible and evolution without falling into hopeless contradiction - as catholic schools have done. They are fast leaving their first love.

388 posted on 05/21/2002 9:08:15 AM PDT by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 382 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
If there is no sin and no need for Christ, why do catholics go to confession every Sunday? Inquiring minds want to know.

-----------------------------

Some people NEED to believe. --Some don't.

If you really had an inquiring mind, this truth would be self evident.

389 posted on 05/21/2002 9:09:45 AM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 358 | View Replies]

To: jlogajan
But He is not human. And whether you believe in the concept of the human soul or not, you risk yours to the same fate as Gould's when you use that type ("sick freak") of invective against the God who gave you life.
390 posted on 05/21/2002 9:11:37 AM PDT by Gurn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 381 | View Replies]

To: Junior
Morals exist external to God

God is ontologically One, Good, True, Beautiful and Being itself. The terms are convertible. God's Goodness or His Moral Law is the good for the human will. God's Moral Law is Truth (and also One and Beautiful).

391 posted on 05/21/2002 9:12:33 AM PDT by Aquinasfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies]

To: jlogajan
You lose on one point, so you shift to another? Adam and Eve give us our sin natures but it is we who commit sins and we are responsible for the sins we commit. God offers everyone a way out - but most refuse to take the FREE GIFT OF ETERNAL LIFE because they love their sins and their hearts are hardened against the love of God. Personally, I like LOVE and LOVE is from God. Humans are only able to Love because we are made in His image. While we cannot love perfectly as our heavenly Father does, we do have the capacity to love, and this is from God.
392 posted on 05/21/2002 9:13:17 AM PDT by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 377 | View Replies]

To: jlogajan
Nature. Self-defense is a natural right -- it is an aspect of nature that an entity with the power to do so will tend to defend itself. There is no need to consult a mythical authority, no need for a tablet of stone detailing the right of self-defense to be handed down from on high, no need to vote about it, no need to consult about it. Indeed, there is no need to convince your attacker that you have the right of self-defense. You simply assert it as needed.

It is also an aspect of nature that the stronger animals will more often than not subjugate the weak -- which is, after all, the manner by which evolution ensures that beneficial mutations are passed on, whereas harmful ones are not.

Which is to say, if nature gives one the right to self-defense, nature compensates by giving one the right to initiate force as well.

Despite this, I seem to recall that you assert that the initiation of force is wrong, while in contrast self-defense is morally justified. Yet if we go by the evidence of "nature" there is no logical basis for your claim.

Indeed, if "nature" is to be our moral guide, then the evolution of predators (including humans who prey on other humans) must cause us to conclude that might makes right.

393 posted on 05/21/2002 9:14:57 AM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
If you really had an inquiring mind, this truth would be self evident.

Obviously, you don't know a rhetorical question when you see one, but coming from someone who identifies himself with a famous God-hater, I am not surprised.

394 posted on 05/21/2002 9:15:46 AM PDT by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 389 | View Replies]

To: Gurn
And whether you believe in the concept of the human soul or not, you risk yours to the same fate as Gould's when you use that type ("sick freak") of invective against the God who gave you life.

Oh pleeeeze! Christians believe that Jews, Hindus, Muslims, pagans, and every other religion (fundies even say Catholics) are all doomed to eternal hell fire anyway.

395 posted on 05/21/2002 9:20:33 AM PDT by jlogajan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 390 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
Didn't we have this discussion a year or so ago? Note my definition of morals (I define my terms for an argument so that there can be no weasling out later -- oh how I wish my opponents would take the hint): Morality is the complex interplay between the needs of the individual and the needs of the group, with the group's long-term needs taking precedence over the individual's short term needs. Such a concept is not required to be enforced by God (God seldom intervenes anyway) and exists solely within the social construct of the group.
396 posted on 05/21/2002 9:21:55 AM PDT by Junior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 375 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
While we cannot love perfectly as our heavenly Father does

So "perfect love" is throwing Jews, Hindus, Muslims, pagans and every other religion into eternal hell fires?

You know, some humans kill their "lovers" who have rejected them. We usually consider them crazy sick freaks and try to fry them on the electric chair. You guys build a religion around a similar nut case.

397 posted on 05/21/2002 9:23:42 AM PDT by jlogajan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 392 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
So, what brand of creationist are you? Are you a Young-Earth Creationist, Old-Earth Creationist, Day-Ager, whatnot? I have asked this question of many creationists and have never gotten a straight answer.
398 posted on 05/21/2002 9:24:43 AM PDT by Junior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 379 | View Replies]

Comment #399 Removed by Moderator

To: jlogajan
No. Christians believe what Christ said. "No man comes to the Father but through Me."

It is man's refusal of Christ's offer that dooms him to hell. Not a vengeful God.

400 posted on 05/21/2002 9:28:36 AM PDT by Gurn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 395 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 361-380381-400401-420 ... 961-966 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson