I read an article not too long ago that massages are actually bad. If I told someone 'Hey, massages are bad.' They would probably say 'Well, feels good, so must be good'. I could respond 'Well, bacon fat is tastes good but isn't good for you.' I thought this argument was important when I was walking back home from work.
I compared the argument to an argument I was having with a classmate named Marko. Marko believes that because we have the ability to believe in a deity, there must be a deity. He said that part of our brain must have been created by a deity for us to be able to believe in deities and science just hasn't discovered it yet.
I tried to explain what I remembered from a speech by PZ Myers 'No Ghosts in The Brain'. PZ Myers explained that sometimes, what I believe to be especially for complex behaviors, the 'desired' trait which has benefits for reproduction or survival may bring about 'byproduct' traits. In Marko's case, appreciation for art and the ability to believe in deities was the byproduct of intelligence.
I don't remember if PZ Myers made the same comparison, but I compared the ability to appreciate art and believe in deities to male nipples. Men don't need nipples but male nipples are a byproduct of evolution. Marko countered that the byproduct of male nipples was only a genetic necessity since, according to him, 'the development of nipples occurs before the development of sex'. I'm not sure there is truth to his statement since sex is determined at the moment of conception (e.i. whether the sperm is an x chromosome or a y chromosome). I continued to tell Marko that the ability to appreciate art or believe in god's may as well be a 'genetic byproduct' just as nipples are.
He asked me to 'prove it'. Double-standard much.
I compared the argument to an argument I was having with a classmate named Marko. Marko believes that because we have the ability to believe in a deity, there must be a deity. He said that part of our brain must have been created by a deity for us to be able to believe in deities and science just hasn't discovered it yet.
I tried to explain what I remembered from a speech by PZ Myers 'No Ghosts in The Brain'. PZ Myers explained that sometimes, what I believe to be especially for complex behaviors, the 'desired' trait which has benefits for reproduction or survival may bring about 'byproduct' traits. In Marko's case, appreciation for art and the ability to believe in deities was the byproduct of intelligence.
I don't remember if PZ Myers made the same comparison, but I compared the ability to appreciate art and believe in deities to male nipples. Men don't need nipples but male nipples are a byproduct of evolution. Marko countered that the byproduct of male nipples was only a genetic necessity since, according to him, 'the development of nipples occurs before the development of sex'. I'm not sure there is truth to his statement since sex is determined at the moment of conception (e.i. whether the sperm is an x chromosome or a y chromosome). I continued to tell Marko that the ability to appreciate art or believe in god's may as well be a 'genetic byproduct' just as nipples are.
He asked me to 'prove it'. Double-standard much.
