Was Adam part of the creation process?

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
We can create lots of things. And be "fruitful" in lots of ways. Doesn't have to be babies. And collectively, we all have strengths to contribute to create something better, if we apply ourselves to that idea. Even the "least of us" has something of value. And the supposed best of us have plenty of problems. Our existence and thriving does not all hinge on biology.
 
Our individual existence and longevity doesn't hinge on biology; our existence and longevity as a species does. There's something to be said for a society where the elders have some influence on marriage decisions of younger generations. They can, perhaps, spot patterns that shouldn't be reinforced.
 
BetteTheRed said:
Our individual existence and longevity doesn't hinge on biology; our existence and longevity as a species does. There's something to be said for a society where the elders have some influence on marriage decisions of younger generations. They can, perhaps, spot patterns that shouldn't be reinforced.
Click to expand...
Sometimes they're just bigoted and it should be none of their business, though.

In ancient societies, arranged marriages prevented close inbreeding - families were more closely related, villages were smaller.

Our longevity as a species depends on empathy and cooperation. We can live on and survive as a species without perfect physical, or mental attributes - if we cooperate. Without empathy and cooperation humans will just kill each other off, and maybe the whole world. Dominance hierarchies are for ancient crusties...I mean, crustaceans.
 
Always a balance, Kimmio. I honestly think that if someone brutally honest and external to the situation had looked at the mental illness minefields that were the families of me and my late ex-husband, perhaps they might have suggested we both look a little harder for a life partner.
 
BetteTheRed said:
Always a balance, Kimmio. I honestly think that if someone brutally honest and external to the situation had looked at the mental illness minefields that were the families of me and my late ex-husband, perhaps they might have suggested we both look a little harder for a life partner.
Click to expand...
Maybe...but the idea that everyone is going to find someone perfect for them is a fallacy...and sometimes lives lived learning to appreciate and care about people warts and all makes us better, stronger people. We are also not the sum total of our mistakes or imperfections. There are truths deeper than biology.

Also...the good looking, physically superior sociopaths are going to have an easier time "breeding" than the average person. Biology dictates that. They see no flaws in themselves that need to change for the greater good. But it doesn't make it a Truth. It makes it a misfortune for the human condition. It's the opposite of Truth.
 
Last edited:
The fact that we can construct theories and narratives to help us better cooperate and thrive...is an outcome of our evolution. To only focus on biology would be devolution. I think, since we 'have' reached the top of the animal hierarchy, and we recognize that...we have a responsibility to rethink how we behave...and equality and diversity - and the development of the social sciences - are part of that. To go backwards and just think of ourselves as no different than apes competing for resources and mates...is devolution. Ideas like eugenics - and close concepts rooted in belief in competing for or striving for superiority in the name of science - serve devolution of humanity. It's not revelatory genius, just because we have long known we have a genetic connection to other animals.

The traits that make human beings unique
 
Kimmio said:
Not only me, of course. There are some socially problematic issues in viewing humans as breeding stock. History proves this (uh eugenics.....
Click to expand...
I'm out again. Can see the train wreck coming miles ahead.
 
BetteTheRed said:
And I'm betting that Little M will be a stronger human, immunologically anyway, than either you or your Mrs. Mixed breed animals are almost always substantially stronger and longer lived than their purebred counterparts. Life thrives in diversity.
Click to expand...

Absolves my confusion over the greatest mix-up ... you ever heard ... one orange and one green?
 
Mendalla said:
Which isn't much of a shock given how many times that region was invaded and received new populations over the centuries since that mummy died.



Impossible. The only human beings with identical DNA are twins (or clones, but we aren't there, yet). They could have the same genetic markers showing they are part of the same population, but not the exact same DNA.

And even that makes no sense genetically, because human populations have shifted and mixed so much, even within historic times, that few people alive today would have identical markers to their own ancestors. And with globalization allowing even more mixing of different gene pools, that will only get more complex. Consider my son who has DNA from European ancestors on my side and Chinese ancestors on his mother's, then consider the mixing and matching that happened in both those regions over the millenia.
Click to expand...
And even with identical twins or clones, there will be mutations that separate them. Ditto for our individual cells. Without actually doing DNA sequencing though the difference are difficult to see. So most likely the DNA tests used in something like crime cases wouldn't show those differences.
Also depends on the DNA we're talking about. Without specifying we all assume we're referring to chromosomal DNA - whether we know the differences or not. Mitochondrial DNA tends to be more similar, while the DNA related to the adaptive immune system (the stuff that makes antibodies) changes rapidly.
 
chansen said:
But that's what we are. It doesn't matter what you want.
Click to expand...
I hope we see more value to ourselves than just breeding stock. Or else I'm useless!
Sure, that's what it essentially comes down to when looking at inheritance patterns over time. Our value is a little more than a breeding bull though, right? There are some people who are just treated as breeding stock and that's sad.
 
I m fascinated with the Hebrew god of the unknown ... being that they applied the word death to wisdom ... thus a wild conception of dying to know?

Metaphorically is that a whoa 'T form ? Considering appalling lisps ...

I've even peeked through a couple of gaps in reality ...
 
The problem is not with seeing us as breeding stock. The problem is seeing other life as breeding stock. We are no different from any other lifeform save in a few intellectual capabilities. I imagine that first contact would quickly put even that bit of uniqueness to paid. Instead of seeing recognition of our being part of all life as a reduction in our value, maybe it's time we put the same value on other lives that we put on human lives. Instead of making it reductionist, take it as a chance to value all of the web of existence more. I don't consider recognition of my kinship to gorillas or octopi or ankylosaurs (see avatar) to be a reduction of my value. I consider to be an increase in my value. That's why I use animal avatars. I'm an animal and proud of it.
 
Mendalla said:
The problem is not with seeing us as breeding stock. The problem is seeing other life as breeding stock. We are no different from any other lifeform save in a few intellectual capabilities. I imagine that first contact would quickly put even that bit of uniqueness to paid. Instead of seeing recognition of our being part of all life as a reduction in our value, maybe it's time we put the same value on other lives that we put on human lives. Instead of making it reductionist, take it as a chance to value all of the web of existence more. I don't consider recognition of my kinship to gorillas or octopi or ankylosaurs (see avatar) to be a reduction of my value. I consider to be an increase in my value. That's why I use animal avatars. I'm an animal and proud of it.
Click to expand...
I do see us a animals too, although I value us more. I don't see an issue with using pigs or cows as food and having some where their main value is as breeding stock. Treat them humanely still, sure.
Treating people the same way we treat livestock even if humanely? Nope.
 
chansen said:
The value of any living creature is more than just breeding stock. But in a sense, that's among the things we are.
Click to expand...

Could be something about the soul-body connection ... and soul is an essence the free emotions would like to putdown ... interferes with wile ... and thus something the wee people shouldn't know ... the preservation goes on longer than virtually required ... due to the metaphor of naïveté ...
 
ChemGal said:
I do see us a animals too, although I value us more. I don't see an issue with using pigs or cows as food and having some where their main value is as breeding stock. Treat them humanely still, sure.
Treating people the same way we treat livestock even if humanely? Nope.
Click to expand...

Oh, I agree. But that's looking at it from a human perspective which we must necessarily do on our time scale. In terms of the bigger picture, though, we as a species are no more valuable or important than any other creature. Our extinction would be (will be) no bigger, or lesser, a tragedy than that of the dinosaurs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top