Charles Darwin was mentally ill

page: 25
50
<< 22  23  24    26 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 12:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
Charles Darwin actually started a new belief system, it was ground breaking in that one now had a scientific out not to believe in God.

To me he is no different than Mohamed or Joseph Smith.

It's interesting that the person that started the belief structure that has lead to mass atheism, was mentally ill.


What do you mean belief structure?
Hate to break it to you, but Darwin didn't start atheism. Modernism thinking is what got the ball rolling in mass numbers. He was just ONE figure in the modernist movement.

I know plenty of theists that recognize evolution as a natural process. In fact, even the catholic church (the poster child for altering their book with modern science) recognizes it as fact.

Now, fundamentalist christians are the ones who have a bit of a problem. They, without even realizing, accept every branch of science (especially the branches that give them computers, cell phones, satellites, flat screen tv's, etc.) but completely disregard biology/evolution, and radiometric dating, and call science flawed.

"science" provides the scientific out to not believe in a god. Scientists base their work on proof, not beliefs.

How are you even comparing Darwin to Mohamed or Joseph Smith? Might as well add Galileo to your list since he too started a "ground breaking" new belief system.

If you were born in the middle east you would be defending mohamed right now. Think about that for a second.



[edit on 2-7-2010 by thepainweaver]

[edit on 2-7-2010 by thepainweaver]




posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 02:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by slank
And he was STILL 5 times smarter than you will ever hope to be.


Just because you asume that he was STILL 5 times smarter doesnt mean that his theory is undisputed the right one.



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 02:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by spacevisitor

Originally posted by slank
And he was STILL 5 times smarter than you will ever hope to be.


Just because you asume that he was STILL 5 times smarter doesnt mean that his theory is undisputed the right one.


No it's just all the evidence proving the theory correct and the theory lasting over 150 years, while standing up to the tests of new sciences and also allowing us to predict the location of certain fossils within rock of a certain time period that makes it the undisputedly correct theory.

There is no respected alternative to Evolution and that is because it works so well, it fits all the facts we have from a multitude of sciences into a really neat little framework.

When people study Evolution and actually understand it they tend to see great beauty, just as some people see beauty in a mathematic formula.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 05:22 PM
link   
By this logic are we to stop examining and enjoying Van Gogh's paintings because he had mental aberrations too? Are the accomplishments of anyone suffering from mental issues to be thrown out the window? Darwin's theory is well substantiated and has stood up to scrutiny for over 150 years. Darwins mental state is a non-issue here. Organisms don't cease to evolve because Darwin may have been mentally ill, if tommorow we recieved incontrovertible evidence that Newton was mentally ill would gravity cease to exist?



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 06:45 PM
link   
You do realise that people back then did all sorts of crazy stuff in the name of health of 'improving their mood'. (uranium therapy anyone???) So giving himself electric shocks doesn't invlidate anything, neither does mental illness or the lack of it. Only solid proof backed up by independant evidence can do than.... Saying someone is wrong because 'they are crazy dont belive him' is a very weak argument.

Those considered mentally ill, wee bit odd (or 'mental abberations') have produced some of the finest art, science and literature in human history. Tesla wasn't exactly playing with a full deck, but would you discount his genius due to his somewhat odd and sometimes very erratic behavior? The list is very long and if you discount one, then you must discont all.


Wayne..

[edit on 4/7/2010 by the secret web]

[edit on 4/7/2010 by the secret web]



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 
One tiny problem with your post: Evolution has evidence backing it, so not only is religion wrong, but it was proven wrong by an mentally ill human being, which says a lot about religion as a whole.

[edit on 6-7-2010 by technical difficulties]



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by technical difficulties
reply to post by Skyfloating
 
One tiny problem with your post: Evolution has evidence backing it, so not only is religion wrong, but it was proven wrong by an mentally ill human being, which says a lot about religion as a whole.

[edit on 6-7-2010 by technical difficulties]


This is a rather unfair statement. Evolution does not disprove religion, it only disproves some creation myths, the ones that state god made each and every animal separately, but it does not disprove god, nor creation. A person could believe in a god and simply believe that he/she/it set Evolution in motion.

This coming from an atheist btw



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984

Originally posted by technical difficulties
reply to post by Skyfloating
 
One tiny problem with your post: Evolution has evidence backing it, so not only is religion wrong, but it was proven wrong by an mentally ill human being, which says a lot about religion as a whole.

[edit on 6-7-2010 by technical difficulties]


This is a rather unfair statement. Evolution does not disprove religion, it only disproves some creation myths, the ones that state god made each and every animal separately, but it does not disprove god, nor creation. A person could believe in a god and simply believe that he/she/it set Evolution in motion.

This coming from an atheist btw
That's a pretty weak way to accept a scientific theory. I mean, come on, filling in the gaps of evolution with "god did it"? That's such a religious cop out. You can't just accept a scientific theory over a religious belief, and then turn around and incorporate a religious belief into it.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by technical difficulties
That's a pretty weak way to accept a scientific theory. I mean, come on, filling in the gaps of evolution with "god did it"? That's such a religious cop out. You can't just accept a scientific theory over a religious belief, and then turn around and incorporate a religious belief into it.


There is no evidence for a god and so i don't believe in a god, however that doesn't mean Evolution has to be incompatible with religious belief. You stated that Evolution was disproving religion but that isn't the purpose of Evolution and nowhere in the theory does it disprove a god at all. To try and twist it for that use is rather silly and as dishonest as the arguments that creationists employ.

Evolution does not disprove religion or god, please don't try and turn it into such a thing. The only parts of religion that Evolution contradicts are certain parts of creation mythology within certain religions.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by anglodemonicmatrix
 


There was a smirk to this reply. :-D

If Stephan Hawking is in a mental condition to learn or teach then there's a response that he's able to type to the machine.

There's not a response that he's able to type to the machine.

Therefore, Stephan Hawking is not in a mental condition to learn or teach.

Stephan Hawking was able to acquire the information from Darwin Theory for regurgitation?

HA! What a joke!

[edit on 7-7-2010 by Erad3]

[edit on 7-7-2010 by Erad3]



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 02:48 AM
link   
I don't know if you have noticed this or not OP, but most inventors or developer of original ideas are always OCD , ADHD etc... All would be considered to have a "mental illness" by boring and normal standards.

That is why they will be remembered, were as you will not.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 02:51 AM
link   
Actually it must suck knowing you are going to die and never have an original thought, or leave anything useful behind.

Now that would make me suicidal.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 03:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by thedeadtruth
Actually it must suck knowing you are going to die and never have an original thought, or leave anything useful behind.

Now that would make me suicidal.


Mocking someone else in this way is uncalled for and just shows up the person doing it. Deal with the argument the OP put fourth and not this ridiculous point scoring.

Also you have no idea who the OP is, she may very well be helping people in her everyday life in some way. She could be a nurse, a doctor, work in a soup kitchen etc.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 04:05 AM
link   
" Helping " someone is not on the same level as having original thought. That is like saying breeding is an accomplishment on the same level as an inventor.

If the OP wishes to list their own accomplishments, then they can, but until then they should be put in their place. Which is not in any position to judge those smarter than them and picking on any faults for obviously ulterior reasons.

Namely trying to say being "spiritual" is the only way to keep sane.

Very disrespectful.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 04:18 AM
link   
reply to post by thedeadtruth
 


I have not defended the OP's post but neither will i allow someone like yourself to use ad hominem attacks, i criticised the OP for the same thing as trying to take down the theory of Evolution by attacking it's creator is a very underhand thing to do.

Attack the information contained within the OP's post, not the OP. Doing anything else actually undermines the entire defense of Evolution, such tactics should not be necessary if the theory is correct (which of course it is).



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 04:26 AM
link   
I respect your opinion, but I do not think defending a dead mans mental state has anything to do with if his theories were right or not. And I think you and I both know that is the OPs intention here.

They are clearly trying to link mental illness and original thought, just because it flies in the face of their opposing mindless belief.

Trust me , the best the OP can hope for in life is getting to mimic and breed. Like all other animals. Which funny enough they do not believe we are related too.

Ironic really.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 04:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by technical difficulties
reply to post by Skyfloating
 
One tiny problem with your post: Evolution has evidence backing it, whereas creationism doesn't, so not only is evolution far more credible than creationism will ever be, but it was founded by a mentally ill human being. If the founder of evolution was mentally ill which says a lot about creationism.
For some reason I won't let me edit my post, so I have to do it this way.


[edit on 7-7-2010 by technical difficulties]



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Did you know that Einstein and Newton were both mentally ill?

In any case, I think the OP is full of crap and his post just stinks of more creationists quote mining

Did you know that Einstein and Newton were both mentally ill?

In any case, I think the OP is full of crap and his post just stinks of more creationists quote mining


Originally posted by Skyfloating

In this abysmal state the guy tells you about the supposed "origin of species" and that we are the result of a chain of coincidences arising from dead matter.



Please show me when & where Darwin ever state that "we are the result of a chain of coincidences arising from dead matter?"


[edit on 11-7-2010 by NegativeBeef]



posted on Nov, 13 2010 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by technical difficulties
so not only is religion wrong, but it was proven wrong by an mentally ill human being, which says a lot about religion as a whole.

[edit on 6-7-2010 by technical difficulties]


Its really difficult to talk or level with "Evolutionists" because they have thousands of false assumptions, one of them being that Im religious.



posted on Nov, 13 2010 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Well, given that every scientific theory (unlike creationist theories) has to be falsifiable and available for peer review...it doesn't matter if or how much Darwin was mentally ill. In over 150yrs no one was able to "debunk" the theory, every new finding fits the theory perfectly, and we're actively using findings from the evolutionary theory in modern chemistry, medicine, and gene technology. We have as much evidence for evolution as we have for "friction", "thermodynamics", and many other scientific theories.

If anything, I think a mental illness would make Darwin even more impressive. I mean, how often does someone mentally ill come up with such a brilliant theory? Once every 200yrs?





new topics

top topics



 
50
<< 22  23  24    26 >>

log in

join