Comintern, you seem like an intelligent/educated fellow. why should intelligent people try to improve the world when society's ideals change and whatever you accomplished to try to improve the world has an extremely good chance of eventually helping the world become what you would consider worse?

to believe in a god/supreme creator you can't believe in evolution....they contradict each other

wow thats so wrong, you can and many people do believe in both, its the closed minded people such as yourself that propetuate this crap.  if you believe in god you believe that "someone" created us at a specific time.  there is proof of evolution going on all around you... animals its hard to see however things that reproduce very quicky IE bacteria, its proven FACT. why do you think the drugs that used to kill off many plagues of man no longer work. they evolved.

> Comintern wrote:

>

I'm guessing this is a moral question. But I question your assumptions here. What does 'changing ideals' or more appropriately, 'changing paradigms' do, in particular, to discourage intellectual discussion and innovation? It is, rather, intellectual discussion and innovation, along and implicit in the shifts in material modes of productivity and the relations to the mode of production that 'produce' shifts in 'ideals'. Ideals would not shift without the co-requisite intellectual dialogues that accompany historical shifts in productivity, technology and social relationships (intellectual dialogue and innovation is, in many respects, included in social relationships).

So my answer then is simple. Intellectual innovations should be encouraged since it is a consequence of shifts in historical modes of productivity. Thus, shifting ideals, a consequence of both material and conceptual evolution, is appropriate to expanding productivity. Civilization can be scientifically measured by its productivity - thus a shift in ideals is a produced of changing productivity and is conducive to the expansion of increased productivity. For example, the antagonist material forces (the class contradictions) of feudal society erupted in revolution. The ideals and philosophy that accompanied the material shift allowed for the expansion of the bourgeois mode of production (of capitalist production) and, thus, allowed for a vast increase in human productivity, i.e. of human civilization.

To halt intellectual progress and dialogue won't allow productive forces to expand after the resolution of material contradictions in society. The contradictions in capitalism, then, could result in barbarism without Marxism rather than scientific socialism and the building of communism which would expand productivity and lead to a quantum leap in civilization (as capitalism was that leap from feudalism). Although, the material tendencies of capitalist society is toward the organization and collectivization of distribution because of the way in which capitalism has already socialized the mode of production (i.e. production has become a global, socialized process, however distribution still remains a local, private process). Still, there is a chance that even given these tendencies, there can be no resolution of the class contradictions of capitalist society, and its disintegration would lead to barbarism, a dark age and a rollback of human productivity. This happened with the Roman Empire where class contradictions were not resolved, and Europe rolled back the progress of human productivity after the system collapsed.

first of all, let me apologize, i must of gotten banned around the time of your post, i would of responded to your response

you basically say that ideals shift as a result of the technological changes that improve productivity, right? but that assumes an objective view of productivity. Productivity is the turning of one thing of a specific value to one of another value. the value of these objects change and a different compared to each individual. there are not right ideals because there are no right values, and the best you can do is hold to your own ideals, which you know humanity will betray sooner or later to become more "productive" and when they become more productive, its because of their technology, which changes their ideals, which changes the values for certain objects and how productive things are.

in short; we both acknowledge the change in ideals over time. the change in ideals means that it is likely that their ideals will eventually contradict our ideals, and any help we've done to progress our ideals have helped go against them. we can either accept the trivialness of ideals inwhich case you arent motivated to do anything; or you can hold to your own ideals; which would mean any work towards them would be betraying your ideals because any work you would do for them would eventually help betray them.

> Lizon wrote:

> There will also be people who refuse to believe in evolution. Course there are also people who still believe that Elvis is still alive, doesn't mean that either people are right of course.

One has to wonder though, what happens to the book of Revelations once humans colonize other worlds? ^.^;

A: It could be interpreted from a less literal meaning... framing the "world" as the realm in which humanity resides, rather than as this one rock.
B: Here's an odd interp:
Perhaps it remains exactly the same.  The plagues, wars, quakes, and every other calamity will happen on Earth.  When the New World was discovered, the first colonists were those seeking religious freedom.  The Bible does take the mention of some refugees: The tribes of Israel fleeing to another place, where they will receive God's protection.  Now, I'm not sure whether there is a specific place mentioned as the place of refuge.  If there isn't, space is definitely a possibility.

So for the people who don't believe in evolution, how old do you think this earth is? Ive heard some crazy answers before and it always gives me a good laugh.

I been in an airplane and I didn't see Got there sitting one one a dem clouds drinking tea and smoking pipe
evidence god doesn't exist ^^

even if a god created earth and all mumblejumble, he didn't live here no mention of that in the bible neither I think?
and would he really care about this one little world in an enormous galaxy
oh wait, outer space is an invention of those whom believe in 'evolution theory'

God was supposed to be an abstract name for all that which is 'good'
and that which is good was decided to fit their culture and time
and my opinion on that is that I don't need a god to tell me what's right and wrong
I have my own invented god and he''s named 'EDN' and he's way cooler than JHWU or ALLALAH

anyways I think the question rather was if the evolution theory is right
namely that we come from monkeys
well, we got some evidence that we relate pretty close and that there were forms relating both of us combined
as steps in between, we got no proof that we existed in the time of dinosours
dinosours we do got proof that they existed unless you want to call those millions of archeologists and their discoveries
lies.

also there must be an explenation showing where we came from up to where we know earth existed, but where we still come from before that, before we were dinos or whatever we got no explanation, but claiming an invented got to be the reason makes no sense, where did he come from btw? oh another god created him yeah that a be it.
also if ghod wants us to believe in his existensce I'm sure he'd given that, so from there I suppose that makes him
hate those whom idol him and talk about him and abuse and disrupt further beauty of the humane development
god just wants a story, the story about humans and how they lived and eventually created the end of his story so that he can recreate or reread (rebirth of jesus) them.

evolution theory is a theory, but not just a theory, it's based on facts/evidences and doesn't mean that there are no moral rights we have to live by, doesn't mean we can go into chaos and do monkeybuzzness. it means whe are this marvelous creation of nature, given the gift to preserve and develop not destruct and bring back to nanscent origin of monkeys.

god is a pokemon, I choose you

maybe I typed their names wrong on purpose and you didn't notice I typed the others wrong aswell?

myeah but I appologise for maybe going a bit to far on that there and being mean
I think for most ppl what they believe or don't believe in depends on in what fam they grew up in.
some switch over as you can see stories about on tv, not always for just reasons, some go to religion cause they
seek sense in living cause they lost all hope otherwise and others leave religion cause they believe that without
they can be free drink and do whatever you like.

in a way isn't it more something of culture and identity forming rather then believing?
your viewpoint might be that I don't know enough to understand what it means
but my view is that you don't understand why I rather object it
I don't think I really object god existing, I just object things written in their books which results to wrong reasoning
anyways

I don't mind feasting/ramadan either,
as long as it doesn't force people whom don't want to
or make ppl who do believe that they're better cause they believe
it should allow to step of it's 'rituals' without it being a sin you commited
at the other hand that doesn't mean you may start drinking if your religion forbids that
alcohol still is something sinfull in a way as it can get wrong when to much
but that's a choice those people have, to risk going to hell

actually I dunno, I'm seeing it as a afterlife belief thing, believing in god
but that's mainly cause if you deny certain things just because you believe otherwise
that I'm thinking you believe the whole package of the otherwise
ah what I'm not even getting how to formulate this, gonna retry:
actually to give my statement, what is it you do believe in? and to what degree
like do you accept that it's unlikely that you go to heaven and hell
or are you rather extreme and even deny the having existence of dinosours and astraunauts
cause really sometimes it doesn't make sense

like I see some 'priests/sect leaders/extremists' on tv whom do claim god to have contact with us
and to decide over our future and the apocalypse shit  (sure there may be an acopalypse but there are
no souls which are after death waiting for then to go either to heaven or hell; I like the idea of souls existing
like budhism I think and some indian religions, where you just get a random new life unaware of the old although
I'm not gonna say I'm sure of that it's just an open possibility)
Like some priests which I do like, like a movie I saw in 'religion class' showed this video
of an islamic priest, christian priest and another one priest  (I know their not all called priest but it comes to the same point) and there they all three got along and agreed that comparing korans that they believe in the same god
that's cool, not that we have prove but you can never know, like in philosophy class I learned that we might
have missing senses, like things we do not see cause we only got the eyes ears etc, and then some example
about a tree being cut down in a forest but no1 to hear or record resulting in the inexistence of sound aswell...
the thing that bugs me is like when religion influences or interupts other lives/people, like the anoying discussions and accusations of people going to hell, like it's not cool to hear someone tell you you're going to get enslaved by their religions god to serve the those sheeps whom did support their god. not that I think those people whom say that really mean it.

anyways, gonna wait to see what you post next, and want to mention aswell that I just post in here cause of interest in
the debate and to see what you exactly think and if there is a gap that proves your thinking to be corrupt or mine to be wrong. the main thing in religion is that people live happily no? and that society works in a right way harming a minimum or attempting to harm nobody right? so the crazy african dances around it are just for personal joy
and then you can believe that if you lived your life 'right' by not harming other people and doing things that helped the world or others or if you are truely sorry you can even be forgiven and therefore if you're innocent you can enjoy heaven if there is one.

as long as you beleive some people are doing God's will better then others, you acknowledge that God can make people a certain lvl of goodness without breaking their ability for free will. meaning he could make everyone that good. because he didnt, you must accept that your belief of what is God's will is faulty.

I read most of these post, and could only understand a small part of all the expensive language being used.

I dont believe in god, i believe in the evolution theory. It makes sense, seeing how much we have incommen with apes or other animals. - anyhow, this is what i believe, people that believe in a god will keep defending their believes.

Moslims terrorist believe that when they die, by blowing themselfs up they will go to heaven and get 72 virgins.
Only good people go to heaven right?
I dont think blowing people up makes you a good person, do you?
Funny how the moslim terrorist leaders always stay alive, not blowing theirselfs up and all that. - Humans are easly to influes with lies and all kinds of other thoughts, even to the point they are prepared to take their own life.

there is a chance that humans aint orginaly from earth.  Meteors have strike the earth more then once. We could have been DNA on one of those aswell meaning there are other humans or more evolved humans out there somewhere

> Zaige wrote:

> I read most of these post, and could only understand a small part of all the expensive language being used.

I dont believe in god, i believe in the evolution theory.

thats fine, just realize the two are not and never were exclusive from each other. the amount of religious people whose beliefs conflict with the theory of evolution of the big bang theory are a minority; they are a loud minority, because their children are being taught things that conflict with their beliefs, but they are a minority nonetheless.

oh god way to long of post to read all that crap for simple answers. For those of you who think the earth is anything less than 4 1/2 billion years old, how do you explain dinosaurs? also they have tested there theory of evolution before in labs :S Ill find some links in the morning when I wake up.

I'm Catholic and I believe in Micro evolution. I think you are missing the boat if you don't believe in it. Why do stupid Christians need to take the bible literally. It was written before science was even invented.

Evolution is how we all came to be. God planned it that way. Deal.