You keep using the word "natural". I don't think it means what you think it means.

[Formaldehyde]

What I really meant was why would they do so when the rationalization was so obvious. This is particularly true when so many of them complain about others not taking responsibility for their own actions.

 

[Rashiminos]

Banging drums? Natural.

Playing the Sax? Unnatural.

 

[timtofly]

Hmm, this reminds me of Descartes. He had as argument for the existence of God that he was necessary per itself. That the World can't exist without him and that men can't conceive it without him. But as my philosophy teacher pointed and I noticed, this argument is only valid to religious people. People who even doubt the existence of God don't see him as a necessary thing.

Which brings me to my own thoughts on the matter. If I remember correctly, it was St. Tomas de Aquino who demonstrated the existence of God through the 5 ways. God is the cause of all things, the original motor of all movement, I don't remember what else and, finally, perfect in all ways and senses.

Which means that God has all virtues and perfections in the highest degree. Then, God can't have created a World as ours, with imperfections and even evil. For when the best of artisans produces one of his works, he doesn't make it flawed in any way.
If God put sin on the World for any reason at all, he couldn't be so perfect, for only cruelty is a motivation to deliberately produce a flawed creation. Therefore, either there is no God or there are several Gods, as I see it, ones having perfections lacked by the others and viceversa.

What I want to mean is that, in any case, I don't consider that God would have anything to do with the conundrums of nature and psychology that are taking our time here.

In my opinion those have always been the seed thoughts for any religions who have more than one God. And yes, even Christianity could be at fault with the three in one religion. They could have invented Jesus and the Spirit to make up where God lacked. I personally do not believe that, but it is quite possible that it could be viewed that way.

I just met a completely new (to me) kind of christian! Very exciting for me, actually. He's married to a cousin of mine, and he's never been one to spend much time on FB. Well, just about a month ago he starts dropping little 'likes' and such on photos that I post. So naturally the algorithm starts to plop some of his posts into my news feed.

Lo and behold this south carolinan christian posts a little graphic poking fun at the idea that humans are related to other apes. I test the waters by simply replying with a link to another image that's a stick figure explanation of what evolution is and isn't.

Turns out he's batty crazy christian, and conflates evolution with the big bang with free will & morality all in the same sentence, as evidence for his god. During the ensuing explanation of evolution and his responses it comes out that he's been defriended by other christians from his circle of friends because they are offended by his christian views. But here's the part that was news to me: he think that the strongest christians keep the torah first, and new testament second. he talks about yhwh and yeshua and such. I had never encountered someone like that before.

No wonder my cousin and he are separated.

If any one can keep the Torah, they are strong at something. It is not an easy task.

 

[timtofly]

Hmm, this reminds me of Descartes. He had as argument for the existence of God that he was necessary per itself. That the World can't exist without him and that men can't conceive it without him. But as my philosophy teacher pointed and I noticed, this argument is only valid to religious people. People who even doubt the existence of God don't see him as a necessary thing.

Which brings me to my own thoughts on the matter. If I remember correctly, it was St. Tomas de Aquino who demonstrated the existence of God through the 5 ways. God is the cause of all things, the original motor of all movement, I don't remember what else and, finally, perfect in all ways and senses.

Which means that God has all virtues and perfections in the highest degree. Then, God can't have created a World as ours, with imperfections and even evil. For when the best of artisans produces one of his works, he doesn't make it flawed in any way.
If God put sin on the World for any reason at all, he couldn't be so perfect, for only cruelty is a motivation to deliberately produce a flawed creation. Therefore, either there is no God or there are several Gods, as I see it, ones having perfections lacked by the others and viceversa.

What I want to mean is that, in any case, I don't consider that God would have anything to do with the conundrums of nature and psychology that are taking our time here.

In my opinion those have always been the seed thoughts for any religions who have more than one God. And yes, even Christianity could be at fault with the three in one religion. They could have invented Jesus and the Spirit to make up where God lacked. I personally do not believe that, but it is quite possible that it could be viewed that way.

I just met a completely new (to me) kind of christian! Very exciting for me, actually. He's married to a cousin of mine, and he's never been one to spend much time on FB. Well, just about a month ago he starts dropping little 'likes' and such on photos that I post. So naturally the algorithm starts to plop some of his posts into my news feed.

Lo and behold this south carolinan christian posts a little graphic poking fun at the idea that humans are related to other apes. I test the waters by simply replying with a link to another image that's a stick figure explanation of what evolution is and isn't.

Turns out he's batty crazy christian, and conflates evolution with the big bang with free will & morality all in the same sentence, as evidence for his god. During the ensuing explanation of evolution and his responses it comes out that he's been defriended by other christians from his circle of friends because they are offended by his christian views. But here's the part that was news to me: he think that the strongest christians keep the torah first, and new testament second. he talks about yhwh and yeshua and such. I had never encountered someone like that before.

No wonder my cousin and he are separated.

If any one can keep the Torah, they are strong at something. It is not an easy task.

 

[classical_hero]

Is this natural?
Shaved orang-utan used as a prostitute.

 

[cardgame]

Is it relevant?

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

That must be the biggest, most blatant non-sequitur I've ever seen.

 

[Arakhor]

Is this natural?
Shaved orang-utan used as a prostitute.

In the sense that you mean 'natural' ("everything I dislike is unnatural"), then yes, it is very unnatural. It's also extremely unpleasant and highly unethical. Otherwise, you really don't know what 'natural' means.

 

[peter grimes]

Is this natural?
Shaved orang-utan used as a prostitute.

Will I be feeding a troll if I ask how this is relevant?

 

[Leonel]

Will I be feeding a troll if I ask how this is relevant?

Too late!