m_m

I was banned twice previously, and I think my presence here is inappropriate.

Here. the brain ≠ the mind.

Why? I wrote that I didn't believe your words. And I assume I have a right not to believe. Because your words are similar to other people's words. What should I think? Good offense is the best defense? I only read what you write, that's all.

I apologize for this.

Less gullible? On the contrary, he believes what people tell him. What about personal experience? Demeaning to your ego. And if you believed, you would complain on God? The thing is, we have to be grateful for everything, not only "good" things, but also "bad". Anyway, I don't want to preach. Not at all, you just write what I read everywhere.

I think, before writing "a god", you had to try to find God, not even a year, not even 5 years. Did you try? I think one needs to walk through that desert before some realization. Because you write some clichés and I don't believe you. It looks like people put some stuff in your head and you believe it. There is no more personal relationship than between man and God. Also, I don't believe when people say "God loves you". Yeah..loves. And it takes a long time to understand that yes, actually everything is Love and only Love. And who do you thank? People? But people can do nothing without God.

But scientists don't know what the mind and awareness are, and what they are for. It's really sad that you write this.

And Acts 39-41 “But our ancestors refused to obey him. Instead, they rejected him and in their hearts turned back to Egypt. They told Aaron, ‘Make us gods who will go before us. As for this fellow Moses who led us out of Egypt—we don’t know what has happened to him!’ 41That was the time they made an idol in the form of a calf. They brought sacrifices to it and reveled in what their own hands had made. Yes, it is a punishment for people, who turned away from God. People, who didn't want to die in a desert and wanted to serve Egyptians. Idolatry I know astrology and I can understand how this is.

OK.

What if some cow said to your face, that you are ungrateful arrogant atheist? Would you argue with a poor cow? Words can cut as a knife. And animals don't talk, they don't deal with our ego and pride. They can't offend us. Gratitude changes the way one lives.

Who would you praise that you can breathe, see, hear, speak, walk on your own feet? We usually think that we have this by default. Our awareness, intelligence, memory, ability to know, to feel..We take them for granted. I read that G.K. Chesterton said that “The worst moment for an atheist is when he is really thankful and has no one to thank.”

OK, swansont, thank you for patience, really.

Ok, I would like to clarify my words. On thing when you compare to find differences and similarities, and another case to judge, good/bad, better/worse.

They are different in their being, objectively, not subjectively. They don't need to be compared. Like colours. Likewise, ages are different by default, there is no need to compare them. Because..what for?

Before comparing, you need to have the original data, what to compare with what. Exactly. I apply the term evolution to medicine, not to infant mortality, which would be natural selection. And you should study what evolution means carefully. Or let's compare YOU with an ape and find out where progress has gone. Why can you join evolution with religion, and I can not join evolution with medicine?

Where is your sampling? The original data? What eras and diseases are you comparing mortality rates from? And the most important question: what for?? They didn't have today's medicine. People used what they had. Exactly. And I'm sure we can apply the term evolution here. Folks apply this term everywhere. And if evolutionary processes have occurred, medicine has just changed. It was a change, not development. Likewise, you can't compare man and an ape, they are different.

Because this is the passage of time. People had equipment which was modern for their age. May I say that previous ages were better because people didn't consider themselves animals or some biological beings??

My point is that we can't compare ages.

And I think no, you can't compare ages. Because there were no modern instruments in previous times. Their medicine was modern for them. People dealt with diseases with the means they had.

I'm surprised. I thought you were an animal. May I ask you, is this your self-identification, or some new theory about the origin of man? * Honestly, reading last threads, I have apocalyptic moods.

May you I remind you, that evolution (it was mentioned above) is a change, not development. So, no, you can't compare ages. And according to evolution now is not better than in the middle ages.

...man, life, intelligence, mind, memory.. but who cares? ..number..

Well, this is my subjective answer to a question from the OP. People didn't have medicine to treat diseases. Today there are also diseases which can not be treated. And in the Middle Ages people also had long lives, despite "bad hygiene."

swansont, yes, you've done a lot. But people of that ages lived as they lived. They had their instruments, they didn't have all this modern equipment. They also struggled to find innovations, made mistakes, they left their inheritance for us. What if your descendants forget things you do?

I'm she, thank you very much. And I think that the black swan argument is yours.