God, Nature and the Dog's Head

Mon Oct 28 20:04:40 EST 2002

--------------D64FAD7FD6F61450B92C51F5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Doug,
I don't profess to say that scientists are arrogant and think that they
have all the answers, but it seems equally foolish to attribute the
phenomena we see around us to a being which cannot be proven, nor
substantiated to the same level of science.  I subscribe to logic, and
the idea that one's beliefs should be based on consistent and reasonable
evidence, not the explanation that seems most convenient or requires the
least thought and comtemplation.  I do not imply that the biblical god
doesn't not exist _for sure_, but I do imply that given all the evidence
so far, it seems unlikely.  If this is incorrect, it was an error based
on my best understanding of the world, and one cannot be blamed for
being wrong if that was the best they could achieve.  As for "what the
h*ll we are doing here", who are we to say that there is any point to
living?  If you talk to most geneticists, they will simply say we are a
temporary storage device for our genes.  And to further reduce things,
if one believes in the laws of thermodynamics and conservation of
energy, there is no point to living at all, as the universe will
ultimately end up being quite lifeless.  So, nothing we do has any
consequences for the ultimate future, but only for the immediate
present, and only in the minds of the people who actually care.  There
is a point to living only if one perceives there to be one, and our
perception has no bearing on what the objective point of living, if any,
really is.  (How does one even define living anyway?  The concept is
purely a construct of the human mind.  If artificial intelligence were
realized tomorrow, would that constitute life?)  I personally believe
that the point of living is to learn about the truths around us, is this
correct, probably not.  More likely than not, the reason I believe this
has more to do with the way I was brought up, and not any logic.

Cheers,
Xi

MexicoDoug at aol.com wrote:

> Hi Wang,
>
> Opinions about the nature of God (or the God of nature) are frequently
> attempts to get in touch with what the h*ll we are doing here, since
> it is so hard to accept our good fortune.  If you pull God from the
> equation things would really seem wierd in my perception.  Today I
> went out and came upon many larvae of Zerene (Colias) cesonia (Pierid
> - called Dog face, Southern Dogface, or Dog's Head butterfly because
> of the profile on the upper forewing), and one crysalid where I saw a
> little dog's face inside through the semi transparent cream-green skin
> developing with rosy pink edges.  Then I watched one of the larva I
> borrowed from the wild go into pupation.  They are truly beautiful
> shows.  What arrogance or genious it would take to think one had all
> the answers to how this developed.  What an undeniable right it seems
> for us to be tranquil, allow ones senses to appreciate a priori this
> miracle, beam and reflect on the simple beauty before them - ! and
> BELIEVE.    (and respect beliefs....)
>
> I'll save you the stories of the Papilio cresphontes and what was
> probably Anartia fatima (not sure), and a slew of moth larvae today.
>
> Happy lepping!
> Doug Dawn
> Monterrey, Mexico

--------------D64FAD7FD6F61450B92C51F5
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
Hi Doug,
 I don't profess to say that scientists are arrogant and think that
they have all the answers, but it seems equally foolish to attribute the
phenomena we see around us to a being which cannot be proven, nor substantiated
to the same level of science.&nbsp; I subscribe to logic, and the idea
that one's beliefs should be based on consistent and reasonable evidence,
not the explanation that seems most convenient or requires the least thought
and comtemplation.&nbsp; I do not imply that the biblical god doesn't not
exist _for sure_, but I do imply that given all the evidence so far, it
seems unlikely.&nbsp; If this is incorrect, it was an error based on my
best understanding of the world, and one cannot be blamed for being wrong
if that was the best they could achieve.&nbsp; As for "what the h*ll we
are doing here", who are we to say that there is any point to living?&nbsp;
If you talk to most geneticists, they will simply say we are a temporary
storage device for our genes.&nbsp; And to further reduce things, if one
believes in the laws of thermodynamics and conservation of energy, there
is no point to living at all, as the universe will ultimately end up being
quite lifeless.&nbsp; So, nothing we do has any consequences for the ultimate
future, but only for the immediate present, and only in the minds of the
people who actually care.&nbsp; There is a point to living only if one
perceives there to be one, and our perception has no bearing on what the
objective point of living, if any, really is.&nbsp; (How does one even
define living anyway?&nbsp; The concept is purely a construct of the human
mind.&nbsp; If artificial intelligence were realized tomorrow, would that
constitute life?)&nbsp; I personally believe that the point of living is
to learn about the truths around us, is this correct, probably not.&nbsp;
More likely than not, the reason I believe this has more to do with the
way I was brought up, and not any logic.
Cheers,
 Xi
MexicoDoug at aol.com wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>Hi Wang,
Opinions about the nature of God (or
the God of nature) are frequently attempts to get in touch with what the
h*ll we are doing here, since it is so hard to accept our good fortune.&nbsp;
If you pull God from the equation things would really seem wierd in my
perception.&nbsp; Today I went out and came upon many larvae of Zerene
(Colias) cesonia (Pierid - called Dog face, Southern Dogface, or Dog's
Head butterfly because of the profile on the upper forewing), and one crysalid
where I saw a little dog's face inside through the semi transparent cream-green
skin developing with rosy pink edges.&nbsp; Then I watched one of the larva
I borrowed from the wild go into pupation.&nbsp; They are truly beautiful
shows.&nbsp; What arrogance or genious it would take to think one had all
the answers to how this developed.&nbsp; What an undeniable right it seems
for us to be tranquil, allow ones senses to appreciate a priori this miracle,
beam and reflect on the simple beauty before them - ! and BELIEVE.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
(and respect beliefs....)
I'll save you the stories of the Papilio
cresphontes and what was probably Anartia fatima (not sure), and a slew
of moth larvae today.
Happy lepping!
 Doug Dawn
 Monterrey, Mexico</blockquote>
</html>

--------------D64FAD7FD6F61450B92C51F5--

 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl 