Option 2. What do you mean by higher perpose anyway? |
|
Were humans meant to have a higher purpose than animals or are we all in the same boat and it just turned out that we have evolved as such. Yes No? discussilimnedo |
|
Oohhumm
Option 2. What do you mean by higher perpose anyway? |
|
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
|
|
If its number two does that mean you had just as much of a chance of being born a rat as a human? |
|
|
|
Of coourse, we are specialler. Our lives should have a higher purpose, it makes us feel good about ourselves, dammit! |
|
naturals are what we call people who did all the right things accidentally
I don't know |
|
Humans are no more special than anything else. You and I are made up of the same sh*t as dirt and a bottle of coke. Carbon, hydrogen and oxygen, that's pretty much it. Just because our molecules happened to be arranged in a slightly different manner than a tree or a gorilla does not make us more special than that entity. |
|
I agree with bradybraker, we are exactly the same as animals, infact we are animals if you'd like to say that, but we just evolved quicker i should say and we have larger brains. |
|
Evolution is not a ladder. We didn't "evolve quicker", we just evolved differently. A chipmunk is just as evolved to its environment as we are to ours. |
|
Ya, I agree too. |
|
naturals are what we call people who did all the right things accidentally
don't get me wrong...I don't think people should treat animals badly, like blowing them up for fun or whatever the hell. but COME ON. |
|
Ignorant bliss is an oxymoron; but so is miserable truth.
Evolution is still a tricky topic, but brady's right. It isn't something like: prokaryotic->eukaryotic->multicellular organism (small fish or such)->amphibian->etc, etc... |
|
|
|
|
|
If perpose=a deity creating us to fulfill some mystical mission, I have a few problems with that: |
|
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
Yes, except a computer is man-made. It uses machinery, hard drives, processors, memory, etc., etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
You make a good argument, that I'll say. However, until I see a computer that philosophizes about how 'it' can exist (on its own accord, through advanced programming and such, not a pre-existing outline of set instructions), I won't change my view that much. |
|
|
|
|
|
No, objectively(or to a diety) I don't see how they could be, but our own subjective preferences definitely tend twoards placing a higher value on human life than on dirt. I think we need to abandon this concept of objective morality, because logically that doesn't get us anywhere. Morality is purely a subjective thing that is created, managed, taught, and enforced by human beings whether they claim to be divinely inspired or not. I would insist that your conscience is infinitely more important to morality than some social or religious code or logical analysis of moral questions just as hunger is infintely more important to the decision of whether or not to eat. |
|
So...we agree? |
|
There's no doubt that artificial intelligence will achieve great leaps in the future. I'm not saying it isn't. I am not going into the laws of physics here, it's obvious the matter in question conforms to them (at least from current observations). However, I am merely admiring the way the brain works, how we can think so abstractly and the like. I don't find this impossible for a computer to do, because humans have created such things. I'm stating this on a biological level, that we, creatures that have evolved over millions of years from simple organisms, can think in such ways and communicate as we do--to think the way we think. A computer, on the other hand, is not going to evolve on some (bear with me here) distant world. It's made by people with existing minds and ideas. |
|
Bookmarks