jump to last post 1-14 of 14 discussions (91 posts)

The lesser evolved

  1. qwark profile image60
    qwarkposted 7 years ago

    Are believers in god/s members of the "lesser evolved" of the human species?

    1. kirstenblog profile image78
      kirstenblogposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Why does it have to be "lesser" not differently or something less insulting to believers and arrogant sounding on your part? hmm

      1. qwark profile image60
        qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Kirst;
        I am not one who is in to "political correctness." I just ask questions as I think of them.
        If others are insulted, isn't that their problem? One can only be insulted if one allows that to happen.
        Besides, I like to ask questions that arouse passion in responses. Is that wrong?

        1. kirstenblog profile image78
          kirstenblogposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          You say 'political correctness' I say 'maximizing effectiveness in choosing my words wisely', patato, pototo (something like that, hard to covey different pronunciations of the same word in text lol). The choice of words you use is not likely to inspire energetic debate and seems likely to spiral into name calling by those on both sides who are easily triggered into such states. It's not wrong to want to arouse passion but it sounded like you were trying to arouse anger? It's all about the words you choose that produces results on a forum that only uses words in text. What point is there in asking questions that have barriers to honest debate within the question itself, why ask something in a way this is not likely to actually produce the response you really want?

          1. qwark profile image60
            qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Kirst:
            Ah, but I want to use words that cause passionate response.
            I wan't challenge!
            During response to challenge, the challenger is hell bent upon making and winning a point.
            When I ask a question like the one I ask here, you said I was insulting? So be it!
            Look at the wonderful responses I'm getting from you?
            In the long run, I get another view of things that may or may not be of value to me. :-)
            I'm not going to ask benign questions which might interest the average Joe blow. I want to pique interest and get strong responses from others whom agree or diagree with me.
            It's fun and can be enlightening.
            What are the forums for? Hmmmm?  :-)

            1. kirstenblog profile image78
              kirstenblogposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              lol well I am rather evolved  (see I can even use cool smileys! haha) Not to mention hard to insult tongue
              Joking aside I think my point is that I am not answering your original question but have instead chatted with you about your choice of words, not that that does not have entertainment value (I would go elsewhere if I found it boring) but the scope of the conversation is more limited to the semantics of word usage. I suppose its good training for a site full of writers! yikes

              1. Arthur Fontes profile image91
                Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                At least you are not anti semantic

              2. qwark profile image60
                qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Thanks Kirst: :-)
                I got you to to reply!
                That's my intention.
                Why ask questions in the forum that get no responses?
                I am perfectly serious when I create a question tho.
                I get both sillyness and seriousness in response...that's expected.
                I love "input" if it is well thought out and well expressed.
                If people get mad at me..cool! Their anger causes me to "think!"
                What's better'n that?
                Thanks for your wonderful responses...:-)

                1. kirstenblog profile image78
                  kirstenblogposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Ahhhhhh!!!!! Semantics tongue *pthhhhhh* (that was a raspberry noise if you couldn't tell, have yet to find a smiley that does raspberries). You say you got me to reply, I say I chose to reply


                  My choice was made because it might be stimulating to challenge the way you asked your question. It was stimulating so your welcome lollol

                  1. qwark profile image60
                    qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Kirst:
                    Hahaha...but ya responded! Gotcha! :-)

          2. Friendlyword profile image61
            Friendlywordposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            What you said makes sense. It took all of air out of my sails, but I have to agree with you. I will be a little more careful when I choose my comments.(A Little)

        2. 0
          Denno66posted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Well, that's like asking: Why does your team suck?

          1. kirstenblog profile image78
            kirstenblogposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Using your response and its question prompts this response: How could your team improve? sounds more productive to me smile

            1. 0
              Denno66posted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Indeed it would. The way the question is asked, will undoubtedly steer the tone of the discussion to either fruitful or useless. big_smile

              1. kirstenblog profile image78
                kirstenblogposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                The challenge for a writer, choosing the right words to illicit the desired response using text alone smile (used to be that one of the big challenges was spelling, thank the computer gods for spell check! lol)

          2. Friendlyword profile image61
            Friendlywordposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            YES IT IS WRONG!!! IT IS SOOOO WRONG!!! And dont you dare stop being real.  There are so few of us here on HubPages.

            You need to separate the good decent Christians from the true believers and fanatics.

            1. qwark profile image60
              qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Friendly:
              How do I seperate the "true believer" from the "fanatic?"

              1. Friendlyword profile image61
                Friendlywordposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                They are the same.
                Sorry to confuse you.
                True Believers and Fanatics use religion to justify the hate they feel for the human race.  They want to control us with hate and fear for each other. God Fearing Christians and Jew, and Muslim just want to live in peace and practice thier faith in a way that does not hurt, but helps to improve the world around them.

          3. Springboard profile image81
            Springboardposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Always a loaded topic and so I hope I don't get into too much trouble here. But here's my take;

            Believers are not lesser. But I do think that it is fair to say that believers are not open-minded. Now, that said, neither are non-believers open-minded. If you can't see the possibility of another truth, then you are closed-minded. So, if you cannot believe God could NOT exist, or if you cannot believe that he CAN exist, you are closed-minded.

            Does that make one lesser?

            No. It just means you are not willing to accept other possibilities.

            I tend to look at everything, including religion with an open-mind. I'll do my homework, I won't automatically debunk any one theory or ideal, I'll simply put the pieces of the puzzle together and make a decision at the end of the day as to what I think is right...

            And also accept the possibility that what I think may still be wrong.

            Having said all of THAT, I would have to agree that your question had an ill-slanted bent.

            1. kirstenblog profile image78
              kirstenblogposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Well said on all counts big_smile

            2. qwark profile image60
              qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Spring:
              I have to agree with you. The question was "slanted." which way is relative to one's bent in ref. to reality or myth.
              I too, put the "trivia" together, like a jigsaw puzzle. When "it" all comes together I can form an opinion which can be used to make decisions and guide my life.
              Do you think monotheists do this? Or are they taught the contents of a book which is not at all credible, about characters as unreal as those in "Grimms" fairy tales and then guide their lives by the illogics of it?
              To my way of thinking that is a form of insanity and is generated by "primitive" fear and superstition..
              That's why I think that those who involve themselves in primitive thought and action and reaction are the lesser evolved of the human species.

              1. Springboard profile image81
                Springboardposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Believing in a religion does not make one insane, though there are insane people who happen to be religious. But then neither does NOT believing make one SANE—there's plenty insane people who AREN'T religious. People have all sorts of reasons to believe or not believe. At the end of the day I may disagree with one's belief system, but it doesn't mean they are lesser of a human being.

                You said you put the trivia together like a jigsaw puzzle. But you're still debunking the pieces that you don't think quite fit to your liking. I said that I was open-minded enough to understand the possibility that what I think to be true may, in fact, be false.

                Without getting too confusing with a lot of metaphors and analogy here, when I put my puzzle together it may look just fine to me and look really out of place to you. Keep in mind that in the case of THIS puzzle, no one knows exactly what it is SUPPOSED to look like. No one can. There's no picture on the box. These are just a bunch of random pieces we have to try and piece together for ourselves.

                If you point to my puzzle and say "That's wrong," and then follow it up with "because you're a lesser form of human intelligence," suddenly your argument becomes moot. How we see the finished puzzle is a matter of where we individually put the pieces—there's really no way (now) to conclusively determine your way is right or mine is not.

                1. qwark profile image60
                  qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Spring:
                  pls re-read what I wrote to you.
                  I put the pieces (trivia) together like pieces in a jigsaw puzzle. If all the trivia "fits" the only conclusion can be a correct picture (concept.)
                  I can then make decisions based upon the "correct" picture (concept) all the pieces just created.
                  All people are not created equal!
                  I am not an Einstein or a Hawking...but they are weak in areas I have proven to be strong in.
                  Ability and aptitude are controlled by genetics. Which makes us all very unique creatures.
                  All people do not evolve at the same rate.
                  Evolution is controlled by "environment." If one's environment is not rich in the availability of everything needed to produce the kinds of genetic possiblities that are intrinsic to you, evolution takes a different path. This path has been defined as "natural selection."
                  I believe that religious belief frustrates open minded learning and therefore controls the believers environment.
                  It frustrates man's ability to "adapt."
                  What does "Cruel" Mother Nature do to those who cannot adapt? ...EXTINCTION.
                  UNFORTUNATELY! The majority of humanity is monotheistic and frustrated.

                  1. Springboard profile image81
                    Springboardposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Your underwear may fit my bottom, but it sure in the heck isn't the "correct" pair.

                    1. qwark profile image60
                      qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                      Spring:

                      They would be if I put them on...:-)

              2. Friendlyword profile image61
                Friendlywordposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                It's starting to look like Atiest, High Minded Thinkers, True Belivers, and Fanatics all have one thing in common. They all take words out of the Bible that were not meant to be taken literally and they run with  those words in four different directions. It's not hard to understand the Bible if you read it with an open mind and common sense. There are great lessons in the Bible for anybody looking to learn about life. Instead, some people are looking to confirm some idea they already had.

                1. qwark profile image60
                  qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  friendly:
                  Really?
                  Why does this biblical god thing demand the murder of so many of the children "it" alledgedly created in "it's" own image?
                  Or did you just flip over those pages?

      2. DogSiDaed profile image59
        DogSiDaedposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        No. What makes you think that?

      3. Pr0metheus profile image61
        Pr0metheusposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        How arrogant do you have to be to actually think this?

        1. qwark profile image60
          qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          pro:
          Why would you think my question to be a sign of arrogance?
          Pls clarify this comment for me...thanks

          1. Pr0metheus profile image61
            Pr0metheusposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Thinking that your more evolved than someone OF THE SAME SPECIES who has different ideas doesn't come off as arrogant to you?

            1. qwark profile image60
              qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Pro:
              It might be thought of as being that if the subject was backed by more reliable and acceptable knowledge of the subject.
              In this case, no arrogance here, just an honest perception based upon my knowledge of anthropology and the rise of belief in supernatural entities by frightened evolving human creatures.
              Modern man has been here for about 30 - 40 k years. He is an "infant" species that when frightened creates and holds tightly to a surogate savior.
              There are those who have intellectually risen far beyond a need for that kind of valueless security.
              They have replaced that need with education, an understanding of that which creates fear.
              Understanding quells fear.
              I believe that these people have evolved to a great deal greater extent, intellectually, than believers in myth..

              1. Pr0metheus profile image61
                Pr0metheusposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Well, that's assuming that all you are is determined by whats in your genes.  Do you think that the situations you have been in, and the way you reacted to them have not played a part in making you who you are?  If so, then you could argue the less evolved theory (either way it will seem arrogant).  I think the answer to the question is undoubtedly no.  I have known many intelligent religious people.  I have also known many intelligent spiritual people.  In fact, some might consider spiritual gurus to be MORE evolved.  Note though, that even though they may think that themselves, nobody mentions it.

                1. qwark profile image60
                  qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Pro:
                  All you CAN BE, IS determined by your "genes.
                  of course I agree with you in ref to my experiences making me what I am.
                  I can't intellectually respond to any of your questions about "intelligence or spiritual."
                  I have no idea what your definition of intelligence is.
                  When you speak of intelligence as I define it, the religion is the antithesis of it.
                  Spiritual? Clarify pls...I know ya don't mean "booze."

                  1. Pr0metheus profile image61
                    Pr0metheusposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Sure, but all that you ARE is not determined by your genes.

                    Spirituality.  As an intellectual individual you cannot deny the fact that we do not know much about the universe.  You also cannot deny that there MIGHT be a "spiritual world" existing on a different dimensional plane that allows communication of thoughts and information through some alternate channels (paranormal).  It is possible.  If these channels do exist, and spiritual gurus are able to tap into it, would they not be more intelligent because they were able to utilize it?

                    I'm not talking religion here.  Religion is a bad thing, no doubt.  It breeds ignorance and violence in the name of a "prophet" who preached peace and acceptance.  I'm talking about spiritual people.

                    1. qwark profile image60
                      qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                      Pro: "...but all that you ARE is not determined by your genes.

                      My goodness!  lol I didn't say that it does.
                      Go back and re-read my comment....

                    2. qwark profile image60
                      qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                      Pro:
                      I can't respond.
                      I asked you what is this thing spiritual you mention.
                      What is it?

          2. Arthur Fontes profile image91
            Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago in reply to this
            1. Pr0metheus profile image61
              Pr0metheusposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              This this this this

          3. kirstenblog profile image78
            kirstenblogposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I hate to answer for someone else but hey I am going to anyway tongue (sorry pro)

            The use of the word lesser in reference to a group that you are vocally not a part of can be easily seen as arrogant as there is the implication that the group you belong to is greater then the other lesser group you are referring to. That would be arrogant. How you choose your words make a wold of difference as to how people respond

            1. Pr0metheus profile image61
              Pr0metheusposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Haha, no no.. Feel free.  I'm surprised that anybody can't see the arrogance in this post.

              1. kirstenblog profile image78
                kirstenblogposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Now the question that comes to mind is: what if you really are better then a particular group, how to state that fact without being arrogant! lol

                1. Pr0metheus profile image61
                  Pr0metheusposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Just don't state the fact?  If you are better than another group, why do you need to tell other people?  It will be realized without you having to state it...

                  1. kirstenblog profile image78
                    kirstenblogposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Assuming your company is intelligent enough to realize it without you having to state it lol hehehehe wink

                    I guess the serious answer would be to not state it but to display it through actions hmm

                    1. Pr0metheus profile image61
                      Pr0metheusposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                      Exactly.  big_smile

                2. Daniel Carter profile image89
                  Daniel Carterposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Hmmm, well the people whom I have considered more "enlightened" than myself, usually look at others as valuable beings, and therefore, usually don't think of themselves as "better." They look at others as being on a journey, and where they are is what is supposed to be. They believe ultimately, the journey brings us to the same place, but at different rates, depending on our resistance or acceptance of "enlightenment."

                  In other words, "evolved" has nothing to do with the equation of who we are individually or collectively, at least as I understand "enlightenment."

                  1. qwark profile image60
                    qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Dan:
                    "...evolved" has nothing to do with the equation of who we are individually or collectively,..."
                    Oh yes it does..:-)

            2. Springboard profile image81
              Springboardposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              That about says it. smile

      4. tantrum profile image61
        tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Are there lesser evolved human beings ?
        I thought we were all the same kind of fools.

      5. sooner than later profile image60
        sooner than laterposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Your church leader thinks so. what would dawkins do? WWDD

      6. starme77 profile image87
        starme77posted 7 years ago in reply to this

        lol makes sense to me lol

        1. qwark profile image60
          qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Starme:
          You are appreciated! Thanks!:-)

      7. Richieb799 profile image64
        Richieb799posted 7 years ago in reply to this

        It depends what you called evolved, Im glad that message I sent last time screwed up because of syntax or whatever because it seems more appropriate here.

        Western civilization has been disregarding the knowledge of less developed civilizations for decades, making people ignorant , where as they live in peace with better form of communications.. while there are wars over money and material gain over here and t.v encourages us to compete over material gain just to serve the economy.

        So if your question is regarding the believe of a god being 'less evolved' or the definition of the word evolved.

        1. qwark profile image60
          qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Richie:
          I'm sorry my friend, but the
          syntax is no better here.
          What you tried to say made no sense.  :-)

          1. Richieb799 profile image64
            Richieb799posted 7 years ago in reply to this

            did the syntax mess up on the comment i made on your hub too? :-)

            1. qwark profile image60
              qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Richie:
              Which hub was that?

    2. 0
      cosetteposted 7 years ago

      big_smile lol @ "patato, pototo" smile

      to answer the question, no, believers aren't "less" anything. idiots come in all belief or non-belief systems.

      1. Daniel Carter profile image89
        Daniel Carterposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Amen, hallelujah, sistah.
        lol

      2. dohn121 profile image88
        dohn121posted 7 years ago in reply to this

        lol cool

      3. kirstenblog profile image78
        kirstenblogposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Glad you liked that big_smile
        Wasn't sure how to convey that saying in text so glad it kinda worked lol

        1. rmcrayne profile image93
          rmcrayneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Potato, patato smile

      4. SandyMcCollum profile image79
        SandyMcCollumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Wow...idiots huh..... not sure I understand what's meant by that, and not sure if I want to.....

    3. DogSiDaed profile image59
      DogSiDaedposted 7 years ago

      The main issue is once again a huge misunderstanding of evolution. It doesn't have 'purpose' or 'drive'. It isn't setting out to enhance anyone. If a species is here it works. Religious people are here, and so are non religious. The word 'evolution' can only be used here as a metaphor and no more.

    4. creepy profile image61
      creepyposted 7 years ago

      you ask a lot of questions for a supposed higher evolved person

    5. 0
      cosetteposted 7 years ago

      haha smile

      hey, i think squiggles mcbeebee has a crush on your avatar wink

      1. kirstenblog profile image78
        kirstenblogposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I am flattered
        But who is squiggles mcbeebee? (I love that name by the way lol)

        1. 0
          SquigglesMcBeeBeeposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          oh hai smile

          Squiggles McBeeBee at your service... wink

    6. Arthur Fontes profile image91
      Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago
    7. 0
      Crazdwriterposted 7 years ago

      *looks around* Wait! this is the Hubber's Hangout? Then why is there a question about religion in here? Oi!

      1. kirstenblog profile image78
        kirstenblogposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Yeah, confusing but hey we have discussed the semantics of word choice in the effectiveness of word choice and semantics and such, not much religion goin on here wink

        1. 0
          Crazdwriterposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          lol Oh so this is a English thread instead of religion? sweet

          1. kirstenblog profile image78
            kirstenblogposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            For a while as I challenged the nature of how the question was asked and if it was maybe a waste if its not likely to produce honest debate but anger and name calling and all the junk, who knows, if a religious question is asked in a way that honestly inspires some spiritual debate it might change wink

            1. qwark profile image60
              qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Kirst:

              you didnt say debate?.c'mon!
              Why would one "debate" that which no one "knows" anything about"

        2. qwark profile image60
          qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Kirst:
          Ok, here comes the religion aspect.
          I am one of the ilk that thinks believers in supernatural divinities are members of the lesser evolved of the human species.  :-)

          1. kirstenblog profile image78
            kirstenblogposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Well I take evolution seriously, its a complicated and highly detailed process with no lessers or greaters. One question that comes to mind is, are humans (taken as a whole) 'better' then say, dogs which can be quite loyal and intelligent or say the dolphin or elephant, both considered to be highly intelligent and capable of some form of communication. This is the problem with your question for me, the lesser value implied because of some 'perceived' difference. It cannot be answered if one does not think in terms of greater and lesser, and is distasteful to one who thinks that it is the very plethora of variations on life that makes being alive wonderful, with those values all life has almost equal value (in a choice ones own species does tend to come first).

            As for the idea that people are differently evolved, genetically there seems to be proof, different face structures and skin colors are kinda clues to me that regions people lived in influenced their bodies. As far as spirituality in regards to evolution, no connection. No 'religious' gene responsible for believing in Jesus, no 'atheist' gene that keeps you from being able to believe in God. My dad and mom are atheists yet as a kid I went to church every sunday alone. I have moved beyond church but I do still believe, if you had any valid point then there would have to be a genetic bio-chemical reason for my belief but I am more then just the sum of my parts.

            I was not challenged on my comment that I am highly evolved wink  Shall I fetch my trenches helmet and await the bomb explosions?

      2. Arthur Fontes profile image91
        Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        You Spin Me Round ♫ http://blip.fm/~iw9ol

        1. 0
          Crazdwriterposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          lol hey Arthur! how ya been?

          1. Arthur Fontes profile image91
            Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I have been good thank you for asking.

    8. Arthur Fontes profile image91
      Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago

      We're Not Gonna Take It  ♫ http://blip.fm/~iwd2t

    9. Arthur Fontes profile image91
      Arthur Fontesposted 7 years ago

      Man On The Silver Mountain ♫ http://blip.fm/~iwde7

    10. kirstenblog profile image78
      kirstenblogposted 7 years ago

      Well guys, it's been swell but the swellings gone down tongue
      I am off to chill out on the couch in front of the idiot box for a bit smile

    11. Pr0metheus profile image61
      Pr0metheusposted 7 years ago

      I did read it, I was just making the counter point.

      I don't think I could do justice to the definition of spirituality.  It's like being religious without being blinded by religious leaders.

      1. qwark profile image60
        qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Pro:
        Then I can't be expected to respond intellectually. I am not familiar with the "spirituality" you refer to...

    12. JYOTI KOTHARI profile image74
      JYOTI KOTHARIposted 7 years ago

      Pr0metheus

      I did read it, I was just making the counter point.

      I don't think I could do justice to the definition of spirituality.  It's like being religious without being blinded by religious leaders.

         
      qwark
            Then I can't be expected to respond intellectually. I am not familiar with the "spirituality" you refer to...

      Spirituality is to "know thyself". It is knowing and acting rightly with conscious mind. It is purification of mind and soul. No religious leaders are needed to be spiritual.
      Thanks,
      Jyoti Kothari

      1. qwark profile image60
        qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Hi Jyoti:

        That is nothing but opinion and ya know what I feel about opinion and conjecture.
        Thanks for responding tho..:-)

    13. 0
      cosetteposted 7 years ago

      tomayto, tomahto, orange, um... never mind.

    14. Richieb799 profile image64
      Richieb799posted 7 years ago

      the gay gene one, I would consider myself agnostic.. but I just noticed that in your hub and remembered reading about the gay gene

      1. qwark profile image60
        qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Richie:
        I'll check it..:-)

      2. qwark profile image60
        qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Richie:
        I don't know why I dont get a message when someone reads one of my "hubs" and leaves a message.
        Sorry I didn't get back to you.
        I answered your response.
        Thanks for taking the time to read it and for your question.

     
    working