Do we need to "settle" all issues? I do not know how I get goosebumps from a mere thought, but does that mean I should not relate the event that led to the little critters spreading like army ants up my back and down my arms and legs? The cause of the event may be a nature rush, the sharing of love, or some other spine tingling emotional occurance. Although many debates are "science versus religion" where finding the 'truth' is the holy grail, I feel our main goal as human ants should be emotional bliss. Expressions of Joy have their own language. They don't require ratification, explanation, or resolution, and ants are not invited.
Ants are the perfect example of evolution with it's head on straight. The problem is, an ants head is used for collecting and eating food, PERIOD. Ants activity is instinctive, as you have pointed out. Would you trade in your imagination and joy of conversing for the sake of it, for a perfectly organized and structured society where you have one defined role? When you build your cities there would be no need for pools, playgrounds, or psychiatrists? I'd take the disorganized rubble of human life, with all of its ups and downs, over the predictable repetition of ant life. Of course, there is always the dentists office that makes one wish that they were born an ant. ;-] On Jul 25, 12:09 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > In a study released online on July 22 in the journal Proceedings of > the Royal Society: Biological Sciences, researchers at Arizona State > University and Princeton University show that ants can accomplish a > task more rationally than our – multimodal, egg-headed, tool-using, > bipedal, opposing-thumbed – selves. The key in this 'rationality' is > that ants don't know much and thus achieve rather speedy collective > decisions. We distract ourselves with all kinds of dross like > religion outside science and endlessly discuss irrelevance in > rationalisation long after we have decided to ignore evidence that > doesn't suit us. In the science versus religion debates we should > have noticed long ago that some people make money out of the activity > and that if we engaged ourselves in creating peaceful societies > something else would matter rather than talking about stuff we can't > settle. > > On 25 July, 15:09, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > No spirit energy then? > > > On Jul 24, 3:42 am, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I'd say we are worm food but I learned from watching CSI it is more > > > accurate to say we are beetle food. That show used to be pretty good. > > > > dj > > > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 1:39 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > There is Science ad Culture. But, as you believe in only one or the > > > > other, > > > > every culture has the belief of a higher being, that is unless you > > > > believe > > > > nothing, and we return to dust or whatever. I'm simply saying, there > > > > used > > > > to be a very big division in what scientists and the "religious" (don't > > > > like > > > > that word, too many negative thoughts have come about with this word. > > > > Guess > > > > what I'm saying is the word "spirituality" is what I would use. Still, > > > > scientists who believe in scientific theory and spiritualists can both > > > > agree. Any takers on this one? > > > > > [email protected] Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
