Quote:
Originally Posted by SUBMAN1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Letum
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUBMAN1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Letum
You have made a logic leap there.
|
In that sense, you are right, since I should be looking at it backwards instead of forwards even though the end result is the same - Humans are not special and on an equal plane as all other species. That would be a more proper way to put it from a logic perspective. I stand corrected in this sense.
-S
|
The leap is still there.
How do you get from "all animals vying [trying(?)] for survival" to "Humans are not
special and on an equal plane as all other species" ?
How does one follow from the other?
The truth (or otherwise) of the preposition in no way gaurentees or reveals the truth
(or otherwise) of the conclusion.
|
Simple - past logic dictates that humans are from a divine nature. This has been this way through the ages. Darwanism however removes this logic and puts humans on an equal plane as all other species who are simply vying for survival, even though it fails to answer some key questions. So what you have done is lower several notches the standing of the human element in peoples minds. Darwanism stops short of actually saying that humans and animals are equal, but it doesn't need to since it implies it. A group like Peta comes along then (it was inevitable) and follows and unfinished theory to its one and only logical conclusion, which raises animals and lowers humans into an equal catagory. Matter of fact, Darwin goes so far as to put humans in the animal catagory so Peta didn't even need to do this.
End conclusion - Peta sees animals and humans as equals. Peta then starts their mad campaign to stop people from eating animal protein or harming animals in any way shape or form based on this logic.
End of story. I wonder if there is any net data on this idea? I will do a search. THis could get interesting to see if anyone has taken this further. Must search.
-S
PS. DOn't get me wrong. I think most parts of Darwins theories are accurate. Just it is a flawed theory in that it can't explain certain things based on survival of the fittest.
|
Subman you finally got there in the end

took you quite a few posts but still, I thought we'd have to spend all night trading insults
Then again we haven't got onto the content of your answer.....:hmm: .....oh well.