Brent meeker writes:> >      > Also Stathis wrote:> >      > > Sure, logic and 
science are silent on the question of the value> >     of weeds or anything 
else. You need a person to come along and say> >     "let x=good", and then you 
can reason logically given this.> >     Evolutionary theory etc. may predict 
what x a person may deem to be> >     good or beautiful, but this is not 
binding on an individual in the> >     way laws governing the chemistry of 
respiration, for example, are> >     binding. > > True.  But evolution does 
predict that an individual of an evolved species will have values, will find 
some things good and some bad, and further that, with high probability, these 
values will comport with reproductive success.  You could for example fairly 
easily distinguish a race of robots who were engineered to serve human beings 
(angels?) from an evolved race of robots simply by their behavior and implied 
values.  > > The former do have lives with meaning - their purposes refer 
outside themselves.  The later have their own purposes.  I'm content to be one 
of the latter.> > Brent MeekerI don't know that the purpose supposed to be 
provided by God is as coherent as your robot example. As I understand it, God 
did not program us to be good or to believe in him because he wanted us to 
arrive at the "right" answer freely. However, he must have programmed us to an 
extent, because our values are at least partly the result of evolution, as you 
suggest. What formula he used to set how much of our values would be determined 
and how much free is not clear. Stathis Papaioannou
Live Search: New search found
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to