This is a great question.

I think by nature, man is group oriented. We're born in a group setting that has authority figures. Then, we're placed in various systems (like education, work) that are also group oriented and have authority figures.

Each of these systems limit what we can do within them.

However, we can also take on leadership roles or seek other systems to join - but doing so exposes us to tremendous risk and responsibility, that's why not many want to change systems or take on leadership roles.

So, for the most part, we're content to stay within systems that have set authority figures that dictate the extent of our freedoms (except in our own households where we may be the leaders - or at least where we pretend to be leaders and really just say yes to our wives :).

Based on the fact that, apparently, 95% of the entire universe is made up of Dark Matter and Dark Energy, two things we have little knowledge of, it seems that we're still very far from understanding the totality of our reality. Plus, we barely even know our own oceans - which cover 3/4 of our planet.

Besides that, we still barely know how our own brains work and can only detect specific frequencies of light/sound/smells as well as a limited touch detection. Plus, we can barely detect magnetic forces - something a lot of animals have already mastered and use for navigation.

So yes, we need a heck of a lot more evolution or at least a lot more tools for detection.

I'm a little confused by the Adam and Eve story to be honest.

First, this god creates this place and everything in it. Then, this god forbids the two initially innocent people from eating the big bright red forbidden fruit, which, I'm assuming this god put there in the first place. To add insult to injury, this god either forgot about or permitted another being to trick or convince the couple to eat the fruit.

In my simplistic analysis, it seems like this god is not an omni-god but in my opinion should share most or at least part of the blame for what happened. So, it's not fair to call the couple evil - inherent or otherwise.

"Free-will" does not apply in this case since we're dealing with a couple, fresh out of the mud, who were easily tricked into doing something they otherwise would not have done. They were ill equipped to recognize the subterfuge.

Any parent worth their salt would've at least said: "and hey, watch out for that shady guy."

When it comes to proof, I think there are accepted standards in place for us to consider something as proof.

Its "evidence" that's more tricky. As you mentioned the difference between the two possibilities you mentioned causing the pencil to move: gravity or telekinesis.

That's why I prefer the scientific method in determining whether something can be considered as evidence or not. Otherwise, all it takes is a charismatic speaker to convince others that the evidence is valid.

In Chomsky's defence it seems that there must be innate cognitive modules to explain things like children's swift ability to learn any languages. — Andrew4Handel

The reason why kids can pick things up easier than adults is that their brains have more plasticity.

This plasticity stops when we reach about 25 years of age.

Hello all,

I think there is a basis for what we call "human nature." In my opinion, it is based on two things:

1. We generally share the same aversion to unnecessary pain and suffering.

2. We are group oriented - we generally rely on the protection/services of the group to survive.

Those two things require the constant re-calibration of our needs with regards to the group we belong to but ultimately, we are doing it out of self-interest.

regards,

8

I agree with VagabondSpectre.

I was baptised and raised as a Catholic and so, formed God-connections with unrelated phenomena all the time. There was god in all the gaps.

But, as I had the chance to live independently from my family (my main religious support group), I stopped inserting god into things and eventually started to see things as either coincidental or as having other natural reasons behind them.

So, the reverse happened to me. All or most of my prior god or supernatural driven neurological connections have disappeared and now, I've developed the habit of trying to find the underlying natural reasons for why things are the way they are.

But, I see the power of God in the Gaps. It's such an easy and efficient method to explain things. That's why it's still so attractive to many people.

Hello xinye,

This is my first post on this forum. I was looking for an introduction page where I could give a background of sorts but unfortunately could not find any such page. At any rate, I apologize for my possibly unconventional or simplistic composition style, as I'm not a Philosophy graduate.

Admittedly, I've used a similar argument with regards to the free-will discussion: if God knew all, then all actions are predetermined, therefore free-will becomes irrelevant.

On Time:

I don't see how the issue of time comes in with regards to this since if you remove "time," this god will still have the knowledge. Knowledge is not dependent on time. It's either this god knows what you will do or it does not.

On Accountability:

This is an issue that I also find troublesome with regards to this topic. All acts are basically permitted or predetermined by an omniscient deity. So, why hold mere pawns accountable?

Nobody knows for sure what such a being would consider as moral or immoral.

But, for us humans, we have to clearly define what are moral or immoral, good or bad acts. Simply put, it makes life easier if we laid out rules instead of relying on "might makes right" for everything. Although it is impossible to remove Might Makes Right, it is far more efficient and sustainable to follow the more humanitarian principle of Preventing unnecessary harm and suffering and promoting well-being.

Therefore, we need to hold offenders of that principle accountable in order to preserve and maintain it.


*Again, I'm likely not doing things right so I hope you'll forgive me.

regards,

8