Meadowchik Posted October 7, 2020 Posted October 7, 2020 On 9/19/2020 at 4:44 AM, mfbukowski said: This is simply a re-statement of Darwinian Evolution. What a koala or I would call well being may differ, but it is not up to me to agree that I must eat Eucalyptus leaves to stay alive, or find female koalas appealing. But if I was a koala I had better figure out what adds to my "well being" or the entire species might die out in a few months. What we call "morality" is crucial to our species, objectively, for the same reasons. Adultery makes for murderous lovers. Abortion, if universally practiced, would exterminate humanity. Crime in general takes people out of the gene pool. Universal lying could make commerce and contracts impossible, and destroy economies, prosperity and civilization. Immoral societies simply don't survive, they can be destroyed by UN sanctions, war, etc. Their neighbors don't like being invaded or enslaved for some reason. Behaviors which allow for more successful reproduction cause the species to prosper in peace and harmony, behaviors which do not, bring about lower reproduction conditions and so hinder the success of the species. It's all Darwin, and I have no problem with that whatsoever. Darwin produced some of the mental concepts now taken by scientists as "objective evidence" in the resultant paradigm. But that has nothing to do with the spiritual paradigm presented by the church in discussing a different question, WHY did God create humanity. What makes a car run (objective truths) has nothing to do with WHY you need a car in your life. One is a how question the other is a why question Why wouldn't life-promoting behaviours be spiritual in nature? Why CAN'T they be very indicative of the answer to "why" we exist just as well as other paradigms?
Recommended Posts