RE: Would you agree?
April 7, 2019 at 3:38 pm
(This post was last modified: April 7, 2019 at 4:00 pm by Simon Moon.)
(April 7, 2019 at 9:08 am)joe90 Wrote: Would you agree with the quote below? Why or why not? I pulled it from Conservapedia.org incase you're wondering.
“Humanity is purposeless. You have no value. You’re a meaningless product of a random evolutionary process that initially developed from the spawn of a single-celled organism. The relationships you derive are also meaningless. Everything that you do in this life has no objective value. You’re living day-to-day only to accomplish the goal of mere survival.”
I would not agree.
1. evolution is not random. It is a selection process put on populations of organisms from various environmental pressures.
2. The fact that we are the result of evolutionary processes, does not mean we are purposeless or have no value. It is up to each of us to create our own purpose and value. Not sure why you would think purposelessness would follow from our being a product of evolution?
I really don't understand theists problem with this? Would you allow: your spouse, the university you attend, your career, your hobbies, the destination of vacations, etc, to be directed and chosen for you from external sources? Then why would you allow your purpose to be directed from external sources? This is one of the main things that defines totalitarian regimes.
3. my relationships are not meaningless to me NOW.
4. My goals go way beyond mere survival.
Why do you take care of your car? After all, one day all of it will only be decomposing metal, plastic, rubber, in the ground. The reason people take care of their cars, is because they have some importance to them NOW. What happens to the cars in the future after the car dies, is not important.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
