Coyne completely disregards the modern theist view that god is behind evolution and that is the source of morality.
I don’t agree with those theists, but if I were writing an article, I wouldn’t ignore their claims.
It makes Coyne look ignorant (ignore -- ignorant).
Steve LaBonnesays
I don’t agree with those theists, but if I were writing an article, I wouldn’t ignore their claims.
It’s always a good idea to avoid wasting time on baloney. It’s pretending to give credence to such stuff that betrays ignorance.
No detectable role of “god” in evolution, no matter how tiny, is compatible with the scientific worldview. Full stop. Not understanding this, now THAT is ignorance. Stop insulting your betters.
By the way, your tedious game of faitheism, trying to avoid taking ownership of your own wishful thinking, is contemptible and fools nobody. It brings to mind “my friend- not I, you understand, but my friend- has this problem…”
“It’s always a good idea to avoid wasting time on baloney. It’s pretending to give credence to such stuff that betrays ignorance.”
Then why write an article on god to begin with?
That’s what Coyne did.
That’s what Professor Singham has blogged about.
Steve LaBonnesays
Not even you are dumb enough to have trouble understanding the logical distinction between referring to god and referring to beliefs about (a nonexistent) god. What you you gain from this kind of silly trolling? It certainly will impress no reader with your wit and understanding.
I’ll take that response to mean that you are dumb enough to have trouble understanding the logical distinction between referring to god and referring to beliefs about(a nonexistent)god.
The irony…………….
Steve LaBonnesays
You can take anything any way you like. I will simply quote a favorite aphorism by Blake: “The Man who pretends to be a modest enquirer into the truth of a self evident thing is a Knave.”
Hmmm….I’ve been referred to as a “troll” by both LaBonne and Henry.
Why?
It can’t be because I’ve commented here….they’ve done the same thing. That would make them trolls, too.
It can only be because I’ve voiced an opinion they don’t agree with. So now I’m a “heathen”…ooopps, I mean “troll”.
The similarities between ideological athiests and theists are remarkable.
Anonymoussays
“Me thinks healthphysicist has turned into a troll. From this point forward I will ignore any comments by HP.”
Agreed. It’s been brewing for a little time now.
With the boring stuff aside, Coyne brings up a point I hadn’t thought much about:
“…the conditions under which humans evolved are precisely those that would favor the evolution of moral codes: small social groups of big-brained animals.”
So has anyone looked to see evidence of a moral code in elephants, dolphins, or other gregarious whales? I suspect there is indeed moral behavoir, but I’m not sure that dolphin ethics would be obvious to a non-dolphin observer.
For that matter, how would a martian spot moral behavior in humans? In Coyne’s example of helping a man who fell in the street it seems obvious to us, but that act might not be so obvious to a non-human observer.
One little nitpick, however: He uses the common terms beast and animal to exclude humans. I expect more from a biologist, especially when he’s given a national-distributed paper as a platform.
In response to the above comment, yes such behavior has been observed in elephants, dolphins, and whales. I have just finished an excellent book The Age of Empathy by primatologist Frans de Waal where he discusses how many of the behaviors that we used to think were uniquely human can be seen in other animals as well.
I am hoping to get around to writing about such stuff in the future.
Anonymoussays
“The similarities between ideological atheists and theists are remarkable”. I agree. Reading this blog and some of the comments, give me the impression that these atheists feel rather insecure. They seem to have a need to constantly reassure themselves.
Steve LaBonnesays
Trust me, the ideological a-Santa Clausists and a-Easter Bunnyists are even more obnoxious. And those ideological a-unicornists? Let’s not even talk about them.
Coyne completely disregards the modern theist view that god is behind evolution and that is the source of morality.
I don’t agree with those theists, but if I were writing an article, I wouldn’t ignore their claims.
It makes Coyne look ignorant (ignore -- ignorant).
It’s always a good idea to avoid wasting time on baloney. It’s pretending to give credence to such stuff that betrays ignorance.
No detectable role of “god” in evolution, no matter how tiny, is compatible with the scientific worldview. Full stop. Not understanding this, now THAT is ignorance. Stop insulting your betters.
By the way, your tedious game of faitheism, trying to avoid taking ownership of your own wishful thinking, is contemptible and fools nobody. It brings to mind “my friend- not I, you understand, but my friend- has this problem…”
“It’s always a good idea to avoid wasting time on baloney. It’s pretending to give credence to such stuff that betrays ignorance.”
Then why write an article on god to begin with?
That’s what Coyne did.
That’s what Professor Singham has blogged about.
Not even you are dumb enough to have trouble understanding the logical distinction between referring to god and referring to beliefs about (a nonexistent) god. What you you gain from this kind of silly trolling? It certainly will impress no reader with your wit and understanding.
Are you saying Coyne/Singham are only referring to god and not referring to beliefs about god?
Or are you saying that Coyne/Singham are referring to both god and beliefs about god?
Or are you saying that Coyne/Singham are not referring to god, but are only referring to beliefs about god?
Please provide evidence for your answer.
Otherwise, no one will be impressed with your wit or lack of understanding.
I’m sure our esteemed host can speak for himself, should he so desire.
I’ll take that response to mean that you are dumb enough to have trouble understanding the logical distinction between referring to god and referring to beliefs about(a nonexistent)god.
The irony…………….
You can take anything any way you like. I will simply quote a favorite aphorism by Blake: “The Man who pretends to be a modest enquirer into the truth of a self evident thing is a Knave.”
Blake the theist?
HA! HA! HA!
I suppose you also think that all admirers of Wagner are antisemites. That would be in keeping with your usual powers of reasoning.
Me thinks healthphysicist has turned into a troll. From this point forward I will ignore any comments by HP.
Hmmm….I’ve been referred to as a “troll” by both LaBonne and Henry.
Why?
It can’t be because I’ve commented here….they’ve done the same thing. That would make them trolls, too.
It can only be because I’ve voiced an opinion they don’t agree with. So now I’m a “heathen”…ooopps, I mean “troll”.
The similarities between ideological athiests and theists are remarkable.
“Me thinks healthphysicist has turned into a troll. From this point forward I will ignore any comments by HP.”
Agreed. It’s been brewing for a little time now.
With the boring stuff aside, Coyne brings up a point I hadn’t thought much about:
“…the conditions under which humans evolved are precisely those that would favor the evolution of moral codes: small social groups of big-brained animals.”
So has anyone looked to see evidence of a moral code in elephants, dolphins, or other gregarious whales? I suspect there is indeed moral behavoir, but I’m not sure that dolphin ethics would be obvious to a non-dolphin observer.
For that matter, how would a martian spot moral behavior in humans? In Coyne’s example of helping a man who fell in the street it seems obvious to us, but that act might not be so obvious to a non-human observer.
One little nitpick, however: He uses the common terms beast and animal to exclude humans. I expect more from a biologist, especially when he’s given a national-distributed paper as a platform.
In response to the above comment, yes such behavior has been observed in elephants, dolphins, and whales. I have just finished an excellent book The Age of Empathy by primatologist Frans de Waal where he discusses how many of the behaviors that we used to think were uniquely human can be seen in other animals as well.
I am hoping to get around to writing about such stuff in the future.
“The similarities between ideological atheists and theists are remarkable”. I agree. Reading this blog and some of the comments, give me the impression that these atheists feel rather insecure. They seem to have a need to constantly reassure themselves.
Trust me, the ideological a-Santa Clausists and a-Easter Bunnyists are even more obnoxious. And those ideological a-unicornists? Let’s not even talk about them.