Evolution and creationism=false IMO

I believe that we are completely inanimate objects on a plane that is composed of fictional things that we classify through science. I also believe that things should not be classified as non living or living beings. I feel that we are made up and that we exist only as our mind makes us believe it. We only try to explain natural phenomenons with words we have from our language. Nothing can be said to be true of anything. We made evolution and creationism up and called it a process and then tried to explain it using language. It's something else. We're made up. The process is made up. Everything about it is made up.

The, "I think, therefore, I am" statement, never ceases making people question reality. We create what we want to create. Falls in the same category as group hallucinations. Though if you believe both of those statements, then it raises the question "What is impossible?". It also wipes out the "If god exists, why do we have war, starvation, etc", and brings up, "Why are humans deciding, then letting these things happens?".

I personally agree with you. Humans do decide their own destiny, and we create what we want to create. War, starvation in third world countries, murder, rape, corruption. The world, and the human species is going to hell, and to find the malevolents, then you only need look into a mirror.

reply to post by Hexidecimal


Don't you think that we are perceiving things as getting worse simply because we are more aware of them now with the advance of technology and instantaneous information? Could it be that it just appears that way because our "neighborhood" has just gotten a whole lot bigger?

What I was saying, was about the structure of reality, and that humans create whatever we want. If we want war, we will have war. If we want love, there will be love. The only god is men.

But what you're saying has a valid point too, and it also ties into what I was saying. Reality is what we perceive it. Technology advanced, we were able to notice more of what was going on around us.

So with our "senses" we deny what we perceive with our "senses"? I think we need to take a step back and start asking the more difficult question here. How do we "know" anything? For example, if we start to doubt our reality and not believe in objective truth then that in and of itself becomes a truth claim.

You can't escape it. To say all is an illusion is a mere assertion. We have to back it up. Now there are philosophers who will go along with what is being said to a certain degree but not fully.

So if we start to deny everything "out there", by the same process we can start denying everything "in here". We could be feed false memories and not even know it for example. But notice something? I used the word "know". I personally believe we "know" things in a much deeper way and are connected to objective truths that we can't fully perceive. The problem would be in describing the process and when an explanation fits the criteria for being an explanation.

[edit on 16-1-2008 by talisman]