[net.origins] Not if we're put here?

dubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois) (04/28/85)

> [Colin Rafferty]
> If we were put on this Earth, then we belong here, and we don't really have
> to worry.  But if we sprang up over the course of 3.5 billion years, then
> maybe we don't belong.  Look at the dinosaurs: around for hundreds of
> millions of years, then wiped out.  maybe that's the way the humans will go.
> BUT NOT IF WE WERE PUT HERE!  If we are here for a purpose, then it's all
> right.

I do not see that this follows.

> But if we sprang up due to this 'Survival of the Fittest' scheme,
> then maybe we don't belong, and maybe something will come along that's
> fitter than us.  BUT NOT IF WE WERE PUT HERE!

> What the main problem most Creationists have is that they are afraid of, not
> their own, but mankind's mortality.

I tried to apply this to myself to see if it was true.  I really did.
I can't resonate to it.  The statement therefore fails in at least one
case.  I think that a demonstration of positive confirmation is needed.

> By believing that they were placed
> here, they don't have to worry about what could destroy mankind, but
> Evolutionists do.  The political forces that lean toward Nuclear War are
> invariably Creationists: Reagan, Faldwell, etc.  Those against are

You make it sound like they WANT nuclear war.  This is irresponsible.

> invariably Evolutionists: Mondale, Sagan, etc.  There is a definite
> connection.

Kind of strange.  If there is no purpose, then why try to prevent our
extinction?  Really.  Why?  Because you feel like it?  Or do you have
a real reason?

> What can we do about this?  The one thing that we cannot do is let this
> feeling of safety be taught in the classrooms.  If we send out a generation
> of people who don't worry about their own future, and leave it in the hands
> of Something else, then what is left of our future?

What "feeling of safety" is this?  And what should we teach?  What we
have now, thanks to the continual fear propaganda is a generation of
kids growing up panicked.  Not very healthy.  Unnecessary, too, I
think, because death is our lot in any case.  It matters more how we
live than how we die.

"The world might stop in ten minutes; meanwhile, we are to go on doing
our duty.  The great thing is to be found at one's post as a child of
God, living each day as though it were our last, but planning as though
our world might last a hunderd years.  I find it difficult to keep from
laughing when I find people worrying about future destruction of some
kind or another.  Didn't they know they were going to die anyway?
Apparently not.  My wife once asked a young women friend whether she
had ever thought of death, and she replied, 'By the time I reach that
age science will have done something about it!'"

C S Lewis, "Cross-Examination", _God in the Dock_, p266.

-- 
                                                                    |
Paul DuBois	{allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois        --+--
                                                                    |
"There are two sides to every argument, until you take one."        |

rafferty@cmu-cs-edu1.ARPA (Colin Rafferty) (04/30/85)

> [Paul DuBois]
>> [Colin Rafferty]
>> If we were put on this Earth, then we belong here, and we don't really have
>> to worry.  But if we sprang up over the course of 3.5 billion years, then
>> maybe we don't belong.  Look at the dinosaurs: around for hundreds of
>> millions of years, then wiped out. Maybe that's the way the humans will go.
>> BUT NOT IF WE WERE PUT HERE!  If we are here for a purpose, then it's all
>> right.
>
> I do not see that this follows.
>

If we are here for a reason, then Whomever put us here wants us here for a
good reason, and He won't let us kill ourselves.  Or if we do, then it is
what He wants, and not what we creatures do to ourselves though carelessness
or stupidity.

>> But if we sprang up due to this 'Survival of the Fittest' scheme,
>> then maybe we don't belong, and maybe something will come along that's
>> fitter than us.  BUT NOT IF WE WERE PUT HERE!
>
>> What the main problem most Creationists have is that they are afraid of,
>> not their own, but mankind's mortality.
>
>I tried to apply this to myself to see if it was true.  I really did.
>I can't resonate to it.  The statement therefore fails in at least one
>case.  I think that a demonstration of positive confirmation is needed.
>

The question therefore is:  Why do you believe in Creationism?  Do you have
some facts that support it, or is it simply a belief that you have due to
some kind of "faith"?  And if you have some facts, I'd really like to see
them (seriously).

I am not putting down faith, but I am asking why you have that faith, and
why do you feel that you need it?  (if you have it at all)

>> By believing that they were placed
>> here, they don't have to worry about what could destroy mankind, but
>> Evolutionists do.  The political forces that lean toward Nuclear War are
>> invariably Creationists: Reagan, Faldwell, etc.  Those against are
>
>You make it sound like they WANT nuclear war.  This is irresponsible.
>

Excuse me, what I meant was that they don't really seem to lean AWAY from
war.

>> invariably Evolutionists: Mondale, Sagan, etc.  There is a definite
>> connection.
>
>Kind of strange.  If there is no purpose, then why try to prevent our
>extinction?  Really.  Why?  Because you feel like it?  Or do you have
>a real reason?
>

How do you infer that there is no purpose?  Why can't we believe that the
human race should survive for its own good?  If we are (as Creationism
implies) the only "living" planet in the universe, than shouldn't we, for
the sake of everything, keep ourselves, as a race and planet, alive?

>> What can we do about this?  The one thing that we cannot do is let this
>> feeling of safety be taught in the classrooms.  If we send out a generation
>> of people who don't worry about their own future, and leave it in the hands
>> of Something else, then what is left of our future?
>
>What "feeling of safety" is this?  And what should we teach?  What we
>have now, thanks to the continual fear propaganda is a generation of
>kids growing up panicked.  Not very healthy.  

The "feeling of safety" is the belief that we were put here and that no
matter what happens to ourselves and the planet as a whole, it's OK since
there is a purpose.  This will be propagated by the teaching of Creationism
since that is what gives the "feeling".

As to the fear propaganda, I know of none that I have received, unless
you're talking about the thing that we learn about nuclear war, and if
that's what you mean, then I don't see how you can call that propaganda.

>Unnecessary, too, I
>think, because death is our lot in any case.  It matters more how we
>live than how we die.
>
>Paul DuBois	{allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois        --+--

How do we live?  Do we make some sense out of what we see around us, or do
we put our blind faith in a Creator who has a Purpose.  This is not how a
Human Being acts, this is how a pet acts.

ward@hao.UUCP (Mike Ward) (05/01/85)

> Why can't we believe that the
> human race should survive for its own good?  If we are (as Creationism
> implies) the only "living" planet in the universe, than shouldn't we, for
> the sake of everything, keep ourselves, as a race and planet, alive?

At least until we have enough time to evolve into something slightly
less absurd.

beth@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (beth d. christy) (05/04/85)

>[From: dubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois), Message-ID: <991@uwmacc.UUCP>]
>>[Colin Rafferty]
>>If we were put on this Earth, then we belong here, and we don't really have
>>to worry.  But if we sprang up over the course of 3.5 billion years, then
>>maybe we don't belong.  Look at the dinosaurs: around for hundreds of
>>millions of years, then wiped out.  maybe that's the way the humans will go.
>>BUT NOT IF WE WERE PUT HERE!  If we are here for a purpose, then it's all
>>right.
>
>I do not see that this follows.
>
>>But if we sprang up due to this 'Survival of the Fittest' scheme,
>>then maybe we don't belong, and maybe something will come along that's
>>fitter than us.  BUT NOT IF WE WERE PUT HERE!
>
>>What the main problem most Creationists have is that they are afraid of, not
>>their own, but mankind's mortality.
>
>I tried to apply this to myself to see if it was true.  I really did.
>I can't resonate to it.  The statement therefore fails in at least one
>case.  I think that a demonstration of positive confirmation is needed.

>[........]

>> What can we do about this?  The one thing that we cannot do is let this
>> feeling of safety be taught in the classrooms.  If we send out a generation
>> of people who don't worry about their own future, and leave it in the hands
>> of Something else, then what is left of our future?
>
>What "feeling of safety" is this?  And what should we teach?  What we
>have now, thanks to the continual fear propaganda is a generation of
>kids growing up panicked.  Not very healthy.  Unnecessary, too, I
>think, because death is our lot in any case.  It matters more how we
>live than how we die.

The original posting by Colin dealt heavily with nuclear war and stated
that evolutionists oppose it *much* more strongly/visibly/vocally than
creationists.

Paul, I'm fairly sure I'm misinterpreting this, but gosh.  Saying that
the fear of unimaginable destruction from nuclear war is "[u]nnecessary
...because death is our lot in any case.  It matters more how we live than
die." sure *sounds* like you're providing Colin with the very "positive
confirmation" that you asked him for in just the last paragraph.

>"The world might stop in ten minutes; meanwhile, we are to go on doing
>our duty.  The great thing is to be found at one's post as a child of
>God, living each day as though it were our last, but planning as though
>our world might last a hunderd years.  I find it difficult to keep from
>laughing when I find people worrying about future destruction of some
>kind or another.  Didn't they know they were going to die anyway?
>Apparently not.

This has just the same ring to it.  Is this *really* what you believe?

-- 

--JB  (not Elizabeth, not Beth Ann, not Mary Beth...Just Beth)