The lesser evolved

1. 59

   qwarkposted 13 years ago

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

   replyreport
   1. 80

      kirstenblogposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

      replyreport
      1. 59

         qwarkposted 13 years agoin 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?

         replyreport
         1. 80

            kirstenblogposted 13 years agoin 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?

            replyreport
            1. 59

               qwarkposted 13 years agoin 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?  :-)

               replyreport
               1. 80

                  kirstenblogposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  well I am rather evolved  (see I can even use cool smileys! haha) Not to mention hard to insult
                  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!

                  replyreport
                  1. 76

                     Arthur Fontesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     At least you are not anti semantic

                     replyreport
                  2. 59

                     qwarkposted 13 years agoin 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...:-)

                     replyreport
                     1. 80

                        kirstenblogposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        Ahhhhhh!!!!! Semantics *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

                        replyreport
                        1. 59

                           qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

                           replyreport
            2. 59

               Friendlywordposted 13 years agoin 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)

               replyreport
         2. 0

            Denno66posted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

            replyreport
            1. 80

               kirstenblogposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  Denno66posted 13 years agoin 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.

                  replyreport
                  1. 80

                     kirstenblogposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

                     replyreport
         3. 59

            Friendlywordposted 13 years agoin 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.

            replyreport
            1. 59

               qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

               replyreport
               1. 59

                  Friendlywordposted 13 years agoin 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.

                  replyreport
         4. 81

            Springboardposted 13 years agoin 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.

            replyreport
            1. 80

               kirstenblogposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Well said on all counts

               replyreport
            2. 59

               qwarkposted 13 years agoin 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.

               replyreport
               1. 81

                  Springboardposted 13 years agoin 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.

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     qwarkposted 13 years agoin 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.

                     replyreport
                     1. 81

                        Springboardposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

                        replyreport
                        1. 59

                           qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

                           replyreport
                           1. 81

                              Springboardposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                              lol.

                              replyreport
                              1. 59

                                 qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                 Spring: :-)

                                 replyreport
               2. 59

                  Friendlywordposted 13 years agoin 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.

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     qwarkposted 13 years agoin 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?

                     replyreport
   2. 59

      DogSiDaedposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      No. What makes you think that?

      replyreport
   3. 59

      Pr0metheusposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

      replyreport
      1. 59

         qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Pr0metheusposted 13 years agoin 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?

            replyreport
            1. 59

               qwarkposted 13 years agoin 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..

               replyreport
               1. 59

                  Pr0metheusposted 13 years agoin 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.

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     qwarkposted 13 years agoin 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."

                     replyreport
                     1. 59

                        Pr0metheusposted 13 years agoin 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.

                        replyreport
                        1. 59

                           qwarkposted 13 years agoin 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....

                           replyreport
                        2. 59

                           qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

                           replyreport
         2. 76

            Arthur Fontesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Heresy ♫ http://blip.fm/~iwcs5

            replyreport
            1. 59

               Pr0metheusposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               This this this this

               replyreport
         3. 80

            kirstenblogposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            I hate to answer for someone else but hey I am going to anyway (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

            replyreport
            1. 59

               Pr0metheusposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

               replyreport
               1. 80

                  kirstenblogposted 13 years agoin 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!

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     Pr0metheusposted 13 years agoin 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...

                     replyreport
                     1. 80

                        kirstenblogposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        Assuming your company is intelligent enough to realize it without you having to state it hehehehe
                        
                        I guess the serious answer would be to not state it but to display it through actions

                        replyreport
                        1. 59

                           Pr0metheusposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                           Exactly. 

                           replyreport
                  2. 64

                     Daniel Carterposted 13 years agoin 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."

                     replyreport
                     1. 59

                        qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

                        replyreport
            2. 81

               Springboardposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               That about says it.

               replyreport
   4. 62

      tantrumposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

      replyreport
   5. 61

      sooner than laterposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

      replyreport
   6. 78

      starme77posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      makes sense to me

      replyreport
      1. 59

         qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Starme:
         You are appreciated! Thanks!:-)

         replyreport
   7. 65

      Richieb799posted 13 years agoin 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.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

         replyreport
         1. 65

            Richieb799posted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

            replyreport
            1. 59

               qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Richie:
               Which hub was that?

               replyreport
2. 0

   cosetteposted 13 years ago

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

   replyreport
   1. 64

      Daniel Carterposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Amen, hallelujah, sistah.
      

      replyreport
   2. 81

      dohn121posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      

      replyreport
   3. 80

      kirstenblogposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

      replyreport
      1. 92

         rmcrayneposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Potato, patato

         replyreport
   4. 63

      SandyMcCollumposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

      replyreport
3. 59

   DogSiDaedposted 13 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.

   replyreport
4. 55

   creepyposted 13 years ago

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

   replyreport
5. 0

   cosetteposted 13 years ago

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

   replyreport
   1. 80

      kirstenblogposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

      replyreport
      1. 0

         SquigglesMcBeeBeeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         oh hai
         
         Squiggles McBeeBee at your service...

         replyreport
6. 76

   Arthur Fontesposted 13 years ago

   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHlopjHe … re=related
   
   
   Words of wisdom only 6 seconds

   replyreport
7. 0

   Crazdwriterposted 13 years ago

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

   replyreport
   1. 80

      kirstenblogposted 13 years agoin 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

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Crazdwriterposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

         replyreport
         1. 80

            kirstenblogposted 13 years agoin 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

            replyreport
            1. 59

               qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

               replyreport
      2. 59

         qwarkposted 13 years agoin 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.  :-)

         replyreport
         1. 80

            kirstenblogposted 13 years agoin 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   Shall I fetch my trenches helmet and await the bomb explosions?

            replyreport
   2. 76

      Arthur Fontesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Crazdwriterposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         hey Arthur! how ya been?

         replyreport
         1. 76

            Arthur Fontesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            I have been good thank you for asking.

            replyreport
8. 76

   Arthur Fontesposted 13 years ago

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

   replyreport
9. 76

   Arthur Fontesposted 13 years ago

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

   replyreport
10. 80

    kirstenblogposted 13 years ago

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

    replyreport
11. 59

    Pr0metheusposted 13 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.

    replyreport
    1. 59

       qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

       replyreport
12. 60

    JYOTI KOTHARIposted 13 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

    replyreport
    1. 59

       qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

       replyreport
13. 0

    cosetteposted 13 years ago

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

    replyreport
14. 65

    Richieb799posted 13 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

    replyreport
    1. 59

       qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

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

       replyreport
    2. 59

       qwarkposted 13 years agoin 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.

       replyreport