A man as we know can reason, make abstract conclusions, distinguish between right and wrong, understand, reflect, plan for the future,make judgements,remember which are falculties independent of matter ?We have free will(to act or not to act), animals act only on instinct and sense[s] which are organs of the body.If a horse has not eaten for one day,and you put hay in front of him,he will eat because his instinct moves him to do so. But a hungry man may fast for days and still refuse to eat.
A man can say no to himself.
Man's free will(to act or not to act) and animal instinct.
Is there a law or theory regarding the change of man's animal instinct to man's free will (the ability to tell himself no, when instinct induces him to give way).Just for research sake.
Thank you.
I apologize for over elaborate details,so to straighten out any ambiguities.
2007-11-24 23:39:34 · 7 answers · asked by BORED II 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
For non-believers who are apt to take offense for there beliefs,the question was fair and straightforward yet no compliance as the question thus far was answered by a christian.
How well do you know your beliefs ? If that is your defence then the answer is evident !
2007-11-25 07:55:39 · update #1
Yes, evolution didn't occur, the ability to choose was with us from the beginning (remember Adam and Eve?).
Your question goes back to the Achilles heel of evolution, our world is far to complex to have occurred by random chance. It is akin to a tornado blowing through a junk yard and assembling a Boeing 747. I design aircraft for a living and actually know how complex an airplane is and that would be impossible. If you want a HIGHLY technical book read "Darwin's Black Box" the book is very analytical, but way over most peoples head (including mine) it is more someone with a chemical or biological background. "Of Pandas and People" is far less technical and understandable to the non biology major.
2007-11-24 23:57:05 · answer #1 · answered by maejcraig 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
First prove we have free will. Then prove animals don't. Then you can try to determine where the change occurred.
I don't think there is a change.
Biochemical activity in the brain probably explains all the mental abilities of humans. There's no need to posit a non-material source.
I don't know much about horses, but I know cats prefer starvation (at least for a few days) to particular kinds of cat food.
And a human choosing to fast chooses to fast for either the same reason (I'll go hungry rather than eat brussels sprouts or whatever) or similar ones: because they value something more than satiation at the moment. We're animals; we're just animals with well-developed brains.
2007-11-25 00:06:34 · answer #2 · answered by Doc Occam 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Animals don't only act on instinct, as any pet owner will tell you.
In one experiment, a rat decided not to push the lever that dispensed food, because at the same time, it shocked another rat. In another, a rat took a risk to save another rat that it thought was in danger.
An injured wolf is not abandoned by its pack. The pack will start bringing food to the wolf until it recovers.
Thoughts aren't "independent of matter" either. Every thought is an electrical impulse along neural pathways. There's nothing supernatural about it.
2007-11-24 23:50:02 · answer #3 · answered by Robin W 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
sorry but I disagree about animals not having free will. All to often I have seen animals presented for anorexia simply because of the loss of a companion or because they did not like the diet they were being given, though they were hungry. I have seen dogs fight the temptation to chase cats because they were told "no" even though they will instinctively chase small prey.
2007-11-24 23:46:55 · answer #4 · answered by dogwhisperer16 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
(Jeremiah 10:23) . . .. It does no longer belong to guy who's walking even to direct his step. . . (Ecclesiastes 8:9) . . .guy has ruled guy to his harm. . . (Daniel 2:40 4) “And contained in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that is basically not further to smash. And the dominion itself heavily isn't surpassed on to any individuals. it is going to crush and placed an end to maximum of those kingdoms, and it itself will stand to circumstances indefinite; Why be a part of something that is going to be destroyed???
2016-10-25 01:11:33 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is the Darwins theory that man came from the monkeys and other related animals like the urangotan
but it has not been proven and it is only speculation of Darwin.
2007-11-24 23:54:50 · answer #6 · answered by Jesus M 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
www.talkorigins.com
2007-11-24 23:44:04 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋