Zone1 Why does anything matter?

[ding]

If you have children it does matter to you. If you don't have children ....... then nothing really does matter at all. If we die of "old age" or at the traffic crossing in an hour from now, it makes no difference if our computer hard disk is filled with passages from the bible or a thousand pornographic photographs.

I feel bad for anyone who is as nihilistic as you are.

 

[alang1216]

How can you not believe this creator - that you are agnostic about - isn't moral and providential?

That is exactly where the evidence does not point.

Thomas Jefferson was a deist and he believed in a moralistic and providential creator because he viewed the universe as a rational, designed system requiring a supreme creator, and believed this creator provided humans with an innate moral sense, guiding natural rights and human happiness.

Thomas Jefferson believed "Divine Providence" guided the American cause because he viewed the successful, unlikely revolution against Britain as a direct intervention of a "Creator" who favored human liberty and happiness. He saw Providence as an overruling force protecting the new nation,, often invoking it to signify God’s role in shaping American history and supporting their moral, political struggle.
Key reasons for this belief included:

• Reliance on a Moral Creator: Jefferson, though often described as a deist, frequently acknowledged a "Creator" who upheld the rights of humanity and favored the "American cause".
• Protection of the Revolution: He saw Providence as a force that shielded the American states during their battle for independence, often referring to it in formal documents and speeches.
• A Unique Historical Mission: Jefferson believed that America was chosen by Providence to be a model of freedom, frequently referencing how Providence had "led our fathers" and guided the nation's establishment.
• Political Utility: For Jefferson, invoking Providence allowed him to bridge religious and secular viewpoints, presenting the United States as a nation under the care of a higher power.
• The "Wall of Separation" Context: Despite his firm belief in a "wall of separation" between church and state, Jefferson maintained that acknowledging an "overruling Providence" was essential to recognizing God’s active role in human affairs.

In his second inaugural address, he directly linked the success of the nation to the "favor of that Being in whose hands we are, who led our fathers, as Israel of old".

So Jefferson believed God was on his side. Doesn't everyone believe that? I'm sure King George believed it when they burned Washington.

 

[Hafar1014]

Based on the available scientific literature, including studies often highlighted in publications like Science and Nature, there is no evidence that humans today are fundamentally more intelligent—genetically or biologically—than humans from 10,000 years ago.

• Genetics and Cognitive Capacity: Research indicates that the cognitive, genetic, and anatomical capacity of Homo sapiens has remained essentially the same for at least the last 10,000 to 50,000 years.
• Brain Structure: Ancient Homo sapiens possessed brains similar in size and structure to modern humans, and if an infant from 10,000 years ago were raised in a modern environment, they would likely be as intelligent as a modern human.
• Genomic Studies: Studies, including those analyzing ancient DNA, have shown that ancient individuals (such as from 3,700–4,100 years ago) had polygenic scores for intelligence in line with modern humans, suggesting intelligence is a stable or neutral trait over that timeframe.
• Knowledge vs. Intelligence: While modern humans have access to vastly more accumulated knowledge, technology, and information, this represents environmental, educational, and cultural advancement rather than a higher innate cognitive ability compared to ancestors.

Note: While some studies in the field of human evolution have suggested that early human ancestors (many thousands of years ago) may have faced intense natural selection pressures that favored high intelligence for survival, this is typically compared to much earlier ancestors, not the relatively recent 10,000-year window.

Yrs there is in IQ test data. It proves humans have increased intelligence in the pat 120 years.

 

[Meriweather]

Yrs there is in IQ test data. It proves humans have increased intelligence in the pat 120 years.

Does the data note whether or not intelligence decreases as a person ages?

 

[Hafar1014]

Does the data note whether or not intelligence decreases as a person ages?

In my opinion as a psychologist the ability to take the test declines. It is normal for some decline as we age. We also must include the role of emotion in how intelligence is applied. We dont use IQ tests for the elderly we use cognitive function tests.
Ager related decline is caused by less blood and oxygen going to the brain. Can we prevent this yes we can.

 

[BreezeWood]

It is normal for some decline as we age. We also must include the role of emotion in how intelligence is applied. We dont use IQ tests for the elderly we use cognitive function tests.

"It is normal for some decline" -

the heavenly creation of life has dual components, physiology and the distinct spiritual content each individual that guides the physiology to its completion. in of itself connotative function, cns is the same as physiological deterioration separate from the heavenly spiritual manifestation that not necessarily has entropy over time and may surpass the passing of its physiology.

 

[ding]

That is exactly where the evidence does not point.

Can you tell me what this evidence is and how it proves this creator - that you are agnostic about - isn't moralistic and providential?

Maybe even start by defining what moralistic and providential mean to you.

 

[ding]

So Jefferson believed God was on his side. Doesn't everyone believe that? I'm sure King George believed it when they burned Washington.

Jefferson believed the creator favored human liberty and happiness because the "Creator" was moralistic and providential.

Jefferson believed that a republic built on democracy was a better way to secure human liberty and happiness than the existing monarch was. Was Jefferson wrong about that?

So if Jefferson wasn't wrong about that, then it isn't as simple as you are claiming. Jefferson didn't believe the creator was on his side. Jefferson believed the creator was on the side of truth.

 

[alang1216]

Can you tell me what this evidence is and how it proves this creator - that you are agnostic about - isn't moralistic and providential?

Maybe even start by defining what moralistic and providential mean to you.

Directed action as opposed to random action.

 

[alang1216]

Jefferson believed the creator favored human liberty and happiness because the "Creator" was moralistic and providential.

Jefferson believed that a republic built on democracy was a better way to secure human liberty and happiness than the existing monarch was. Was Jefferson wrong about that?

So if Jefferson wasn't wrong about that, then it isn't as simple as you are claiming. Jefferson didn't believe the creator was on his side. Jefferson believed the creator was on the side of truth.

England is now a democracy. A Creator that waited 13+ billion years for mankind could surely have been patient for a few hundred years more.

 

[ding]

Yrs there is in IQ test data. It proves humans have increased intelligence in the pat 120 years.

It has nothing to do with physiology. It has to do with better nutrition, more schooling, and increased cognitive stimulation, rather than genetic changes. Take an infant from 10,000 years ago and magically transport it to today and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

 

[ding]

Directed action as opposed to random action.

Can you please explain that a little better?

 

[ding]

England is now a democracy. A Creator that waited 13+ billion years for mankind could surely have been patient for a few hundred years more.

If that is your way of conceding my point that Jefferson believed the creator was on the side of truth and not just him personally, that's a really poor way of showing it.

But to your point evolution occurs over time in a sequential fashion. You might as well be arguing that the "creator" should have created the universe in it's finished state rather than a state of journeying which is a way more impressive feat.

 

[alang1216]

Can you please explain that a little better?

Directed action refers to purposeful, goal-oriented behavior driven by the anticipation of specific outcomes, whereas random actions are without a central, guiding objective. A moralistic and providential universe would display the former.

 

[ding]

Directed action refers to purposeful, goal-oriented behavior driven by the anticipation of specific outcomes, whereas random actions are without a central, guiding objective. A moralistic and providential universe would display the former.

Did the laws of nature direct stellar evolution? Or do you believe stellar evolution is random? Did the laws of nature direct biological evolution? Or do you believe biological evolution is random? So existence most certainly did direct specific outcomes, right?

 

[ding]

A moralistic and providential universe would display the former.

A moralistic universe would be one where right and wrong were based upon logic and truth. A providential universe would be one where successful behaviors naturally lead to success and failed behaviors naturally lead to failure. A moralistic and providential universe would be one that didn't force right and wrong upon you but would allow for you to choose it yourself. A moralistic and providential universe would be one that provided feedback on your behaviors in the form of consequences.

Does this seem like the kind of universe that you live in?

 

[alang1216]

Did the laws of nature direct stellar evolution? Or do you believe stellar evolution is random? Did the laws of nature direct biological evolution? Or do you believe biological evolution is random? So existence most certainly did direct specific outcomes, right?

True but not moralistic or providential.

 

[alang1216]

A moralistic universe would be one where right and wrong were based upon logic and truth. A providential universe would be one where successful behaviors naturally lead to success and failed behaviors naturally lead to failure. A moralistic and providential universe would be one that didn't force right and wrong upon you but would allow for you to choose it yourself. A moralistic and providential universe would be one that provided feedback on your behaviors in the form of consequences.

Does this seem like the kind of universe that you live in?

Nope. I think you're confusing the universe with human culture.

 

[ding]

True but not moralistic or providential.

How do you know?

 

[ding]

Nope. I think you're confusing the universe with human culture.

No. I'm basing it on reality. Do you believe all behaviors lead to equal outcomes? Do you believe that choices have consequences? Do you believe that certain choices lead to better outcomes? Do you believe that certain choices lead to worse outcomes?

If so, how is that not existence providing feedback to you?