Universe's Intelligent Design by Evolution (UIDE)©

[MagnetMan]

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow

Evolution (by natural selection) takes place whereby certain adaptations are better suited to a particular enviroment, and those with these adaptations reproduce whereas those without them do not. Organized states have nothing to do with it.

I thought the idea of a mechanistic universe went out the window yesterday already. We are in the Nuclear Age now. Your line of reasoning is becoming increasingly invalid.

It's amazing how far off track people can get when they begin with a faulty premise. Albert Ellis would have a field day with you...

Makes one wonder why he was thrown off his own board.

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by MagnetMan

I thought the idea of a mechanistic universe went out the window yesterday already. We are in the Nuclear Age now. Your line of reasoning is becoming increasingly invalid.

Considering I was explaining to you the process of natural selection, what is the relevance of your comment above? And exactly how does a categorization of our current society being in a nuclear age make the appropriate description of natural selection invalid?

Originally Posted by MagnetMan

Makes one wonder why he was thrown off his own board.

Wow... did you read that whole first paragraph, or just the last line?

Yeah... because a Board full of humans following their own interests is never motivated by politics and agendas... Please...

Basically, he was old and his health care costs enormous and they couldn't afford to keep him there any more, so requested he step down.

http://www.albertellis.info/crisis.html



http://nationalpsychologist.com/arti...rt_v14n6_1.htm

A source, speaking on condition of anonymity but close to the situation, said that since the vote to oust Ellis at least two members of the board have claimed they were coerced into voting Ellis off the board and later repudiated their votes

My point was that you consistently speak in terms of "musts" and "oughts," and the work of Albert Ellis very clearly demonstrates that this is a major cause of psychological dysfunction. He used Cognitive Behavioral Therapy to treat it, but the application to your posts remains appropriate.

[MagnetMan]

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow

Considering I was explaining to you the process of natural selection, what is the relevance of your comment above? And exactly how does a categorization of our current society being in a nuclear age make the appropriate description of natural selection invalid?

I was indoctrinated with that explanation in grade school. I am a big boy now and i no longer regurgitate predigested information. Natural selection is a theory. I believe in intelligent purposeful evolutionary progressions - culiminating in human consciousness - which is still in the process of on-going development and will one day arrive at a transcendental state of God-Consciousness I came by that realization under my own steam.
It's my own theory and I am sticking to it.

My point was that you consistently speak in terms of "musts" and "oughts," and the work of Albert Ellis very clearly demonstrates that this is a major cause of psychological dysfunction. He used Cognitive Behavioral Therapy to treat it, but the application to your posts remains appropriate.

I am sorry if I come on too strong for you and Mr Ellis - but I am fighting an entrenched pseudo-intellectual mind-set and if persecution is part of the price I must pay for being assertive......

[InfiniteNow]

Hmmm... feelings of persecution too? Whoa... A whole cornicopia of neuroses.

It's not persecution when you're wrong and people are telling you you're wrong. It's called accurate feedback and criticism, you self-righteous, delusional... oh, sorry. This is the theology forum.

I respect your beliefs.

[MagnetMan]

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow

Hmmm... feelings of persecution too? Whoa... A whole cornicopia of neuroses.

It's not persecution when you're wrong and people are telling you you're wrong. It's called accurate feedback and criticism, you self-righteous, delusional... oh, sorry. This is the theology forum.

It is persecution when you know you are right and the mob is jeering at you for not denying yourself. I am not neorotic about it, it comes with the job. I used to be part of the mob myself.

I respect your beliefs too. Time changes everything. Intellegent progression is always at work, you too will grow up one day

[InfiniteNow]

The sound of one man laughing: me!


http://www.schizophrenia.com/diag.html

Diagnostic criteria for schizophrenia (USA criteria)

Characteristic symptoms: Two (or more) of the following, each present for a significant portion of time during a 1-month period (or less if successfully treated):


Delusions - false beliefs strongly held in spite of invalidating evidence, especially as a symptom of mental illness: for example,
Paranoid delusions, or delusions of persecution, for example believing that people are "out to get" you, or the thought that people are doing things when there is no external evidence that such things are taking place.

Delusions of reference - when things in the environment seem to be directly related to you even though they are not. For example it may seem as if people are talking about you or special personal messages are being communicated to you through the TV, radio, or other media.

Somatic Delusions are false beliefs about your body - for example that a terrible physical illness exists or that something foreign is inside or passing through your body.

Delusions of grandeur - for example when you believe that you are very special or have special powers or abilities. An example of a grandiouse delusion is thinking you are a famous rock star.

[Zythryn]

Originally Posted by MagnetMan

I was indoctrinated with that explanation in grade school. I am a big boy now and i no longer regurgitate predigested information. Natural selection is a theory. I believe in intelligent purposeful evolutionary progressions - culiminating in human consciousness - which is still in the process of on-going development and will one day arrive at a transcendental state of God-Consciousness I came by that realization under my own steam.
It's my own theory and I am sticking to it.

It is your own theory?

Very good then MM, perhaps you can enlighten us then.

A theory comes from a hypothesis which is formed from observations. After the hypothesis is formed, it is tested. If it passes the tests it is then a theory.

I am curious about your theory and what tests have been performed to substantiate it. Also, what test results would be required to disprove it?

On the flip side, you could win a Nobel prize if you would publish the test results which disproved natural selection.

Or, is it possible this is all speculative opinion and not actually a theory (in which case you would have none of the above as it is not needed for an opinion).

Thanks for your time,
Mark

[Eclogite]

MagnetMan,
I do raise an eyebrow at a member of the illustrious Hypography staff choosing to imply (almost infer) that a plebian participant, such as yourself, is schizophrenic. However, it is not without provocation. I say this on two grounds.

1. You seem to impart many (most? all?) of your comments with an absoluteness that science, philosophy, experience and common sense, all suggest are more relative or uncertain.
This can be provocative, deflecting attention away from the proposition to the manner of its presentation. Is this what you desire?

2. You often adopt a patronising, dismissive tone. For example,
I am a big boy now and i no longer regurgitate predigested information.
or,
You will grow up one day.
Such remarks could be offensive to anyone who valued your opinion.


You do seem to have an unusual take on evolution. What is it that gave you the impression that it involved advancement to higher forms, as its primary attribute? The impression one is left with from a detailed study of the fossil record and a consideration of the mechanisms of genetic change is that it leads to fitter organisms that, by chance, are sometimes more advanced than before. In contrast, it always leads to organisms that are fitter for their existing environment. On what basis do you challenge this generally accepted position?

[IMAMONKEY!]

Heh.. youve gotta be kidding me. thats either complete crap or the whole human race is schizo. Creationists would be schizo, or so it would seem. Now im just 15 so to you guys my opinions probably dont mean anything though mods might insist otherwise (i dont believe that, im 15, i dont expect you to take me seriously), but somatic delusions sounds a lot like hypochondria. or is Hypochondria just a part of schizo?

Now... ive looked at the theory of UIDE or whatever it is called. I personally think it is sorta what ive believed in for the few self-conscious moments of life ive had.

Ive come to realize that there seem to be two main categories of people on this planet, of course there ar emany categories but for the sake of this post lets keep it at two. There are those who are thinkers, and those who simply react to the world around them, constantly changing. Ironically. I happen to be a thinker which is why i love the philosophy and humanity topics more than anything else.

My mother is an adapter. My father the thinker. I am a thinker and also one who adapts his thinking. My father and i use the term sociomorphic.

Now i personally believe there is an intelligent entity out there, a god if you will. He is outside of our universe but directly affects it through some sort of control. I dont think "god" is theuniverse, but just the controller of it. That is just a little too farfetched to believe for me.

I'm probably going to get flamed ...

IMAMONKEY!

[IMAMONKEY!]

ALso... Zythryn. Philosophy is not an exact science. It cannot be tested. By what you stated, then there are no theory's in philosophy other than those that bend into other sciences. This bends into another science, but a science that we know so little about that we can merely speculate.

IMAMONKEY!