in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
Yes, my mistake to call them humanoids. They were anatomically modern humans.
And I'm advocating just one catholic tradition about putting an approximate date to the MRCA.
Some traditions of thought says the dates can be stretched and not be the literal genealogy in Gospels.
But the concept of humankind having a common ancestor who received a soul directly from the Creator of the universe is the main belief.
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
There's a psychological theory that says these people maybe not were conscious at all. The modern human behaviour is very recent in history.
Read the link about Bicameralism in my previous post.
http://www.functionalneurology.com/materiale_cic/224_XXII_1/2108_the%20bicamiral/index.html
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
Well I have no objections with the scientific theory about the origin of life. The theory of evolution is the most beautiful theory in science and it explains a lot in different areas (economics, languages, etc).
We catholics believe God created directly the universe (Big Bang theory was made by a Catholic priest BTW).
And about 6 thousand years ago God created the first soul in one of the several races of humanoids (following the pattern of "chosen people") . Afterwards this race had a very obvious advantage and killed or/and assimilated the other humanoids. God directly creates every soul since then.
And we believe this soul is immortal and have some conditions to achieve while in this animal body (with a mortal animal soul too).
Sorry my broken English. I have about three languages stored in my mind.
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
"l'm puzzled about what your point is. Are you saying nobody had a "soul" until 3000 years ago?"
That's the Christian position. The first humanoid received a soul about 4,000 BC. And it became the firs human with a soul.
This is an interesting psychology theory about it:
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
I said the Genesis account does not have a scientific precision.
But the concept of a common ancestor just a few thousand years ago it's not unscientific.
And you're very wrong about the MRCA of humans had existed just millions of years ago.
There's the bottleneck effect too...
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
Well is Nature magazine.
And this concept is compatible with the genealogy in the Gospels. Adam and Eve lived about 4 thousand years BC.
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
I don't know what science you are reading but the most recent common ancestor of modern humans is just a couple of thousands years ago.
Assuming that no genetically isolated human populations remain, the human MRCA may have lived 2,000 to 4,000 years ago.
Rohde DL, Olson S, Chang JT; Olson; Chang (September 2004). "Modelling the recent common ancestry of all living humans" (PDF). Nature. 431 (7008): 562–6.Bibcode:2004Natur.431..562R.doi:10.1038/nature02842.PMID 15457259
http://www.stat.yale.edu/~jtc5/papers/CommonAncestors/NatureAncestorsPressRelease.html
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
The Catholic view is God created the universe and set natural laws to it.
One of these laws is the evolution algorithm. It created the human body and the primitive mind in it.
In some recent point, God chose a pair of these humanoids and put a soul in them. If the sons of the first couple took theirs mates from the others humanoids it was not bestiality, because there was no difference in the material body. And theirs sons received a human soul afterwards because is believed that every soul is created directly by God.
This belief is consistent with the scientific knowledge about the most recent common ancestor and the human modern behaviour.
The recent fundamentalist view on Genesis is not the traditional view of Christianity. Saint Augustine said in the third century the Genesis account it's a theological explanation.
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
Well if I have to tell you why we can say animals don't perceive infinity and humans do...
You're are wrong about the date of the most recent common ancestor of humans. It existed just a few thousand years.
Only Christians consider matter as separated from God. Others religions consider matter as a body of a god. In these religions you cannot study matter but you must worship it.
And you're are a positivist if you consider the scientific method the only valid knowledge.
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
Viviane I was referring to the most recent common ancestor of humanity.
The soul is what produces the sense of infinity in your mind. And the search for meaning, justice, beauty and so on. No other animal do that. So we can assume we have some extra in our animal minds.
I know you're a positivist. I don't know if you're aware of that but you belongs to a failed French philosophy.
Science could only be created in the Christian theology.
