If we exist only because of some kind of random explosion in the cosmos, and have no purpose in life. If there is no afterlife, no spirit, and no hope...If we truly are no different than a wild animal, a bird of prey, or a cockroach, than why do we have any set of standards of behavior at all? Why might these same people be upset if there is murder, rape, pillage, and chaos? Aren't we just just behaving according to our "nature". Isn't this survival of the fittest?
2007-11-18 17:34:44 · 11 answers · asked by Mom of seven 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
First, Darwin and atheism have nothing in common. He just theorized that we evolve (and not from other animals or "cockroaches"). Read about the survival of the fittest.Also, he believed in God.
2007-11-21 09:37:40 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The promise of eternal life is no reason for existence on this earth. Why not just cut out this life and go for the eternal one.
We are no different from wild animals in that we murder each other ( by the millions in wars) and rape and pillage and chaos are not far below the surface. See Iraq.
But over the centuries people have tried to improve this situation out of mutual self interest. It is called civilisation and systems of ethics and law and order were set up among advanced nations long before the advent of today's popular religions which have singularly failed to improve behaviour.
You don't find many atheist suicide bombers.
Please note the spelling of ATHEIST. It's not that difficult.
2007-11-19 01:48:34 · answer #2 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We and many other species survive by co-operation within our species and survival of the fittest when we are in conflict with our own or other species. Ants have a structured co-operative civilisation as we do, but if we threaten their nest they will bite and try to kill us and we will do the same to them.
To some extent we compete as humans and the fittest survive but fittest does not always mean physically fittest. A doctor survives because of his intelligence and usefulness to other people and in that he is fitter than a wrestler, even though the wrestler is better equipped for physical conflict survival.
There is no point to life but to get the maximum satisfaction from it while we have it because it is only temporary. The best way for us to obtain that satisfaction is to co-operate to survive so the doctor protects the soldier, the soldier protects the teacher, the teacher teaches the child who will become a doctor or soldier and so on.
2007-11-19 01:44:45 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
1) Other animals have standards of behavior, too. If you've ever heard of a mating ritual, you've heard of standards of behavior. They are evolved reactions to help "keep the peace"
2) It can be hard to understand that evolution involves more than just physical processes, it invloves soceties and the bigger picture as well. Societies have evolved morals to keep people from murdering, etc to, again, "keep the peace". It is advantageous to work together and stay away from chaos, so that's what we work toward.
3) It is survival of the fittest, to an exstent. We as a society have a kind of evening out process (medicine, welfare, etc)
2007-11-19 01:48:30 · answer #4 · answered by Lauren P 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What a foolish question. We ARE here. We should do everything we can to make society better and to make this life the best that it can be. To enjoy it and help others to enjoy it.
We are different from the lower animals because we have evolved to be self aware.
Why is this so hard for some people to understand. Do believers only live for the ''afterlife'' with no concern for mankinds life on earth?
2007-11-19 02:33:06 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The purpose of man is different than the purpose of all other known life. Their purpose is to exist as the rocks and gas exist. Our purpose is to find a purpose fitting to the idea of "Man qua Man" on the individual level.
Our nature is not "survival of the fittest" except perhaps in genetics. To reach a state of "Man qua Man" ethics, political science, and metaphysics must be of the highest standards or we will destroy each other.
No other species is capable of destroying the rest of its species.
And because we must attain that high standard of "qua Man," we are certainly not "goo-man." We are by DEFINITION the "rational animal."
2007-11-19 03:17:06 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You don't understand we are not goo to start out with but our behavior is causing us to evolve. The use of drugs and alcohol are added to steroids and fake fat and sugar create the prime opportunity for our minds to end up as goo-man.
Of coarse with the proper application of Faith and Hope we can reverse this trend. Both proper diet and behavior are not popular with the goo propagators but sooner or later they will just slither away on their own petard.
2007-11-19 01:49:06 · answer #7 · answered by noyoungun 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sometimes, these duplication of the dormant nature of man as beast is not sucint. It is a fact that although man has been in his evolution a superb predator, man is also a caring and giving creature in his evolution. So there is not really a sore point in the issue that you begin to question.
2007-11-19 05:57:18 · answer #8 · answered by Qyn 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Satan is very clever the way he fools people.It is just so easy for him, and all because of God's generosity in letting him exercise an extended power over the world.Can't you see what's happening ?.Everyone is dissatisfied, they cannot abide each other.You call this being civilised?You have to be joking!
2007-11-19 04:57:06 · answer #9 · answered by ROBERT P 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's my theory also. I think IT IS survival of the fittest.
2007-11-19 01:39:28 · answer #10 · answered by ? 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋