Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


German nationalist party ...
Today at 01:15 PM

Lights on the way
by akay
Today at 01:08 PM

Russia invades Ukraine
Today at 11:01 AM

Muslim grooming gangs sti...
Yesterday at 09:31 PM

Islam and Science Fiction
February 11, 2025, 11:57 PM

New Britain
February 11, 2025, 09:32 PM

اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
February 08, 2025, 01:38 PM

Do humans have needed kno...
February 06, 2025, 03:13 PM

Gaza assault
February 05, 2025, 10:04 AM

AMRIKAAA Land of Free .....
February 03, 2025, 09:25 AM

The origins of Judaism
by zeca
February 02, 2025, 04:29 PM

Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
February 01, 2025, 11:48 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Evolution and Morality

 (Read 48514 times)
  • Previous page 1 2 3 45 6 ... 12 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #90 - June 26, 2010, 01:46 PM

    Quote
    No it isn't.  Why are you making stuff up on the spot and then believing it?  Don't you think primate society is more important than how strong they are?  If all primates were 25% weaker tomorrow would they die?  No!  Their cooperation is far more important.

    If a primate group is attacked by another group, whether or not they survive depends on the physical strength of the male members, no?

    May be I shouldn't have said the most important trait for primates is physical strength, but its definitely important, whereas for humans its importance has watered down a lot.

    And yea, i'm leaving this discussion too.. OP repeatedly dodges questions and when faced with an argument he can't answer, he goes on to say 'its just your opinion'. Not any different than Mrasheed.
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #91 - June 26, 2010, 02:00 PM

    If a primate group is attacked by another group, whether or not they survive depends on the physical strength of the male members, no?


    So if one group have 20 members and the other 10 strength is the most important factor?
    What if one group throws stones but the other doesn't?

    Anyway, I am unsubscribing from this thread now Smiley

    I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
    http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #92 - June 26, 2010, 03:35 PM

     beatdeadhorse

    (I've always wanted to use that icon  grin12 )
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #93 - June 26, 2010, 04:59 PM

    That's a great massage technique! Really relaxes the muscles..

  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #94 - June 26, 2010, 05:29 PM

    No, it is a fact.  What a gene pool needs in order to increase it's survival is diversity.  A German scientists tested the "pure DNA" hypothesis after WWII by starting a new civilisation named Nueva Germania.  Years later the population are riddled with genetic diseases.


    Years after WW2? how many like 50? This looks like an interesting example though...

    Quote
    It IS immoral.  I repeat (for about the 5th time), morality is what society chooses it to be.  It IS immoral because the majority of people consider it to be immoral.  Unnatural? No.  Immoral? Yes!


    interesting. So you atleast agree that rape is natural and the only reason it is immoral is because people dont like it.

    I get the feeling that during the time of ghengis khan that rape was also considered immoral by the majority of humanity. Does this mean that Ghengis Khan was an immoral person?

    Quote
    There was nothing wrong with what he was doing from a social/morality point of view.  There is no "wrong" in terms of evolution, only cost vs benefit.


    ok so if there is no way it can be wrong from an evolutionary standpoint and you agreed that during Muhammad's time society anywhere on the world didn't deem child marriage to be immoral.

    So then can we please stop the "muhammad is a pedo thing" on this forum because it would be considered hate speech. It's for everyones own good too because it just makes CEMB look ignorant anyways.

    Quote
    What a man dead for over 1400 years did is of no interest to me, however if his example means people think it is okay to continue doing the same thing then it becomes relevant.


    Fair enough so wouldn't the proper thing to say is "what muhammad did was simply normal for his time but now it is considered immoral"

    instead of Muhammad is a pedo omg ahahahah he fucked a nine year old omg ahahahahahah

    (not saying you do this but 90% of CEMBers do)

    Quote
    Not a very helpful response.


    it was my nice way of saying I think its a BS reason to call something immoral. It's like saying a 45 year old woman has a higher chance of miscarriage/birth defects so her trying to have a baby is immoral.

    As long as a woman has reached sexual maturity she has the right to procreate from an evolutionary standpoint.

    I'm an asshat.
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #95 - June 26, 2010, 06:02 PM

    I'm jumping in here having read the first 2 pages and then skimming - so apologies if I'm repeating what someone said.
    In nature you will find lots of behaviour which is objectively detrimental to the individual (but good for a group) - yet survives.  For example various birds call out when a predator is nearby (giving away their position, but informing others that a predator is nearby).  Rabbits have a "flashing" white tail when they run - making them easier to spot. 
    This is evidence of game theory and the prisoner's dilemma in nature.  (Google it).  Basically the collective gain of such behaviour is greater than the loss for the individual.
    A second issue is that survival of the fittest doesn't apply to individuals - it applies to genes (read Dawkin's Selfish Gene).  Genes are *interested* in self replication and don't care how that is achieved - collective measures can ensure survival of copies of themselves in other animals that share those genes (e.g. siblings). 
    Humans are such an animal - and have an instinctive sense of "fairness" - though in nature it is only intended to relate to family members and small tribes. 
    Morality is an extension of this - and a universalising of the underlying principles. 
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #96 - June 26, 2010, 06:07 PM

    No, I already said that women probably equated it with strength and an ability to protect them.  I suspect height is more about biological evolution than sexual selection.  What's your obsession with height? What point are you trying to make? Do you think that humans should be 500ft tall or something?


     Cheesy
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #97 - June 26, 2010, 06:08 PM

    Among primates the alpha male mates with many females and physically prevents the weaker males from reproducing. Modern laws stop this from happening within humans.

    That's not entirely correct.  First of all alpha males still reproduce with higher numbers of females than others.
    Secondly societies which discourage rape have proved to be more successful at ensuring reproduction than societies that do not - it may be possible that these are related.
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #98 - June 26, 2010, 06:19 PM

    Humans are such an animal - and have an instinctive sense of "fairness" - though in nature it is only intended to relate to family members and small tribes. 


    This is the point I was making in the thread. There was no "all for one and one for all" theme with all of humanity at any point in our evolutionary history.

    That's not entirely correct.  First of all alpha males still reproduce with higher numbers of females than others.
    Secondly societies which discourage rape have proved to be more successful at ensuring reproduction than societies that do not - it may be possible that these are related.


    the point I was trying to make here didn't have to do with rape. It had to do with primates cockblocking lesser males in order to make sure their genes were passed on. (in a violent way). This obviously still exists today but just not in a violent way.

    I'm an asshat.
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #99 - June 26, 2010, 06:20 PM

    Cheesy



    I'm an asshat.
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #100 - June 26, 2010, 06:26 PM

    Awww... what's happened to the poor wee fella? He seems to be missing quite a bit of fur!

  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #101 - June 26, 2010, 06:51 PM

    ok this post may seem a little fucked up and I'm not trying to start a debate just hear your views. Now to give you a little background before I became Muslim I lived a pretty materialistic life. i didn't care about religion or morals. The people I hung out with really didn't talk about this stuff.

    After I became Muslim you obviously know what i believed but it was during this time that I first started thinking about evolution seriously. I always rejected it when I was Muslim because it basically said we were animals and thats basically what drives us. food, shelter, reproduction. Our basic mission in life was to make sure our genes were passed on to the next generation.

    Now I take it most (if not all of you) believe in evolution. Survival of the fittest. but you guys also seem to believe in a world view that somewhat contradicts "survival of the fittest". It almost seems that people who try and do exatcly what humans are supposed to (pass on their genes in the best way possible) are deemed to be immoral.

    Ghengis Khan would be a perfect example of this. I read that 1 out of 5 chinese people have his genes in their body. He would be the ultimate example of someone who made sure their genes lived on. But he did this through rape murder ect. "survival of the fittest" but people will criticize Muhammad for his immorality but he didn't do 1/10th of the shit genghis khan did.

    So how is ghenghis khan (or muhammad) immoral for basically doing what humans are supposed to do? If our ancestors didn't do similar things we would not be here today. Animals aren't evil for fighting each other. Animals more or less force themselves on their mate and it's not considered evil.

    People talk about all the evil religion has caused but it seems darwinism has caused even more because it has spawned all kinds of thing like nazi eugenics ect. which make total sense in relation to evolution if you think about it. (i.e killing retarded people, people with birth defects ect..)

    So how can we say the morals of a certain religion are wrong when we are basically just animals and anything goes. Animals can't be evil. There is preadtor and prey. But now if you are seen as predatory against other humans this is frowned upon. It seems these new age world views only serve to keep weaker genes in the pool and actually protect inferior humans despite this being contrary to "survival of the fittest".

    Shouldn't we kinda try to live our lives like this...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V30tyaXv6EI

    I'm just asking this because i really dont know what to believe after Islam.

    Why do you need to believe anything? Just figure out what it takes to lead a 'good' life and follow that. Have a look at Humanism - see the links on CEMBs front page and chase it to the Humanist Charter.

    Religion is ignorance giftwrapped in lyricism.
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #102 - June 26, 2010, 07:01 PM

    I don't mean like people who are seriously diseased but say short males (5,9 and under), males with less than 20/20 vision, frail, small penis ect...these traits have no place in our gene pool and these people would not exist if it were not for modern morals (religious or otherwise) giving them a fair shot at reproduction.

    You
    I don't mean like people who are seriously diseased but say short males (5,9 and under), males with less than 20/20 vision, frail, small penis ect...these traits have no place in our gene pool and these people would not exist if it were not for modern morals (religious or otherwise) giving them a fair shot at reproduction.

    I'm afraid you completely misunderstand Darwin and evolution and terms like 'fittest'.  Darwin just described the world as he observed it, nothing more.
    sometimes smallness is an advantage and 'fits' an organism more for survival where a larger version (phenotype) would be at a disadvantage (see plains elephants versus forest elephants. The same goes for 'frailness', a nebulous concept, and penis size - some species manage without a penis.
    Remember the little guys in black pyjamas and tyre sandals who whopped the overfed yanks in Vietnam?

    Religion is ignorance giftwrapped in lyricism.
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #103 - June 27, 2010, 07:44 AM

    In terms of height and muscle mass would you say that japanese people are equal to nigerians?

    In terms of explosive speed do you think japanese people are equal to nigerians?

    There is a reason why there are no japanese or white sprinters in the olympics.

    Yeah but there are a lot of Japanese people in Japan, funnily enough, which kind of buggers your theory on "survival of the fittest". I mean aren't you aware that Japanese people are just as evolved as any other humans? Then take your old mate Genghis. He was Mongolian. Tiddly little fuckers with short legs. Wont find any of them in the Olympic sprints either. Why do you think they got so good at riding horses? It was the only way they could see over the grass.

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #104 - June 27, 2010, 07:47 AM

    haha well youre not exactly being fair.

    rape was a large part of the reproductive strategy for prehistoric man

    You're talking out your arse here.

    The word "prehistoric" means "before history". In other words, before we have any reliable records. Given that we have no reliable records you cannot make such statements and expect them to be regarded as factual.

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #105 - June 27, 2010, 10:17 AM

    Why do you need to believe anything? Just figure out what it takes to lead a 'good' life and follow that. Have a look at Humanism - see the links on CEMBs front page and chase it to the Humanist Charter.


    The question I was asking myself and you guys was... if I lead my life like ghenghis khan is that immoral? Did he lead a "good" life? does leading a good life mean acting in a good and moral way or does it mean enjoying and being successful in life?[/quote]

    You


    Huh? no u

    Quote
    I'm afraid you completely misunderstand Darwin and evolution and terms like 'fittest'.  Darwin just described the world as he observed it, nothing more.


    Ok thanks I came in here saying that I didn't know very much and I'm willing to admit where I have gone wrong or misunderstood something. Thanks for clearing this up.

    Quote
    sometimes smallness is an advantage and 'fits' an organism more for survival where a larger version (phenotype) would be at a disadvantage (see plains elephants versus forest elephants. The same goes for 'frailness', a nebulous concept, and penis size - some species manage without a penis.


    Fair enough. But the point I was trying to make is that in HUMANS height is considered a desirable trait along with large penis size. So would it be fair to assume that people who posses these traits are genetically superior to those that don't?

    Quote
    Remember the little guys in black pyjamas and tyre sandals who whopped the overfed yanks in Vietnam?


    the way you say this it seems like youre implying they whopped them DESPITE their small stature. Correct me if im wrong.

    I'm an asshat.
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #106 - June 27, 2010, 10:25 AM

    Yeah but there are a lot of Japanese people in Japan, funnily enough, which kind of buggers your theory on "survival of the fittest". I mean aren't you aware that Japanese people are just as evolved as any other humans? Then take your old mate Genghis. He was Mongolian. Tiddly little fuckers with short legs. Wont find any of them in the Olympic sprints either. Why do you think they got so good at riding horses? It was the only way they could see over the grass.


    I'm not sure why you and @li have misunderstood this point.

    @li said that all races were equal in terms of genetic traits i.e there were just as many tall japanese people as there were nigerian people. (which is crazy)

    I just brought this up to prove that all races were not equal. They may have have different positive traits that others dont possess but you cannot call them equal.

    You're talking out your arse here.

    The word "prehistoric" means "before history". In other words, before we have any reliable records. Given that we have no reliable records you cannot make such statements and expect them to be regarded as factual.


    It is simply a theory (just like evolution itself) so I think accusing me of talkin out of my arse is a little unfair. Here are some interesting links...

    http://www.scienceblog.com/community/older/2001/C/200113635.html

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociobiological_theories_of_rape

    I'm an asshat.
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #107 - June 27, 2010, 10:33 AM

    You just blew it. Don't start with "evolution is just a theory".  Roll Eyes  In any case you made a statement as if it was certain.

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #108 - June 27, 2010, 10:35 AM

    Ok so if height is so desirable why was Genghis so short?

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #109 - June 27, 2010, 10:37 AM

    You just blew it. Don't start with "evolution is just a theory".  Roll Eyes  In any case you made a statement as if it was certain.


    wut? I'm sorry if it came off like i was stating as a fact but it is an accepted theory.

    Are you saying evolution is a fact?

    I'm an asshat.
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #110 - June 27, 2010, 10:38 AM

    Ok so if height is so desirable why was Genghis so short?


    He wasn't.

    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_tall_was_Genghis_Khan

    I'm an asshat.
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #111 - June 27, 2010, 10:38 AM

    Of course its a fact.  Didn't you know that?  Evolution is a fact and evolutionary theory explains how it works, like gravity and gravitational theory.  You'd want to do some background reading before you try and debate a topic you know nothing about.

    "Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny."  - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #112 - June 27, 2010, 10:39 AM

    wut? I'm sorry if it came off like i was stating as a fact but it is an accepted theory.

    Are you saying evolution is a fact?

    Yes, evolution is a fact.

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #113 - June 27, 2010, 10:42 AM


    Link says it is highly speculative and there is little evidence for it being adaptive.

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #114 - June 27, 2010, 10:44 AM

    Link says it is highly speculative and there is little evidence for it being adaptive.


    right but you said he was "so short" without ANY evidence at all. Are you being entirely fair in your arguments?

    I'm an asshat.
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #115 - June 27, 2010, 10:45 AM

    Of course its a fact.  Didn't you know that?  Evolution is a fact and evolutionary theory explains how it works, like gravity and gravitational theory.  You'd want to do some background reading before you try and debate a topic you know nothing about.

    Yes, evolution is a fact.


    please read this guys http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact

    I'm an asshat.
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #116 - June 27, 2010, 10:47 AM

    right but you said he was "so short" without ANY evidence at all. Are you being entirely fair in your arguments?

    I was winding you up.  grin12

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #117 - June 27, 2010, 10:49 AM

    I was winding you up.  grin12



    I'm an asshat.
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #118 - June 27, 2010, 10:51 AM

    Oh and this from your OP appears to be bullshit:

    Quote
    Ghengis Khan would be a perfect example of this. I read that 1 out of 5 chinese people have his genes in their body. He would be the ultimate example of someone who made sure their genes lived on. But he did this through rape murder ect. "survival of the fittest" but people will criticize Muhammad for his immorality but he didn't do 1/10th of the shit genghis khan did.


    According to wiki:
    Quote
    Zerjal et al. [2003][36]  identified a Y-chromosomal lineage present in about 8% of the men in a large region of Asia (about 0.5% of the men in the world). The paper suggests that the pattern of variation within the lineage is consistent with a hypothesis that it originated in Mongolia about 1,000 years ago. Because the rate of such a spread would be too rapid to have occurred by genetic drift, the authors propose that the lineage is carried by likely male-line descendants of Genghis Khan, and that it has spread through social selection.

    8% is 1 in 12, and they say the spread of the gene could be due to social selection (ie: dynastic marriages).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genghis_Khan

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Evolution and Morality
     Reply #119 - June 27, 2010, 10:53 AM


    We know all that already. You said evolution was "just a theory". It isn't. We were right. Tongue

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Previous page 1 2 3 45 6 ... 12 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »