B Weinstein´s Biological Views: Religion Literally False, Metaphorically True

In response to B Weinstein´s veiws on the evolution of religion.... brmc • 3 days ago • edited The gist of this seems to be that "a belief may result in an increase in the fitness of a person's offspring"....until conditions of abundance no longer exist and the "fitness" of those offspring becomes a liability. The lack of any metaphysics beyond the forces of evolution in that explanation leaves something to be desired. So why is he bothering? Except to point out that "religious" belief is natural and genetically based. But that would apply to the potential for enlightenment as well. Reality-as-it-actually-is does not start and stop at the boundaries of genetic expression. Our consciousness being more deeply rooted in the nature of Nature than mere survival of the fittest.

− Avatar greenpeaceRdale1844coop brmc • 2 days ago • edited "So why is he bothering?" etc. Good points. Your thought follows what University-based scholarship organizes into modern philosophical ranges, including the Philosophy of Religion, aka metaphysics, and the philosophy of Comparative Religious Studies and its explicit multidisciplinary resources. In fact, there IS a metaphysics behind the "forces of evolution," except that "scientists," i.e. scientific philosophers, have shown how technical focus involves its own temptations to assume "magical" power. In fact, the assumption of physical lawful regularities was achieved by Christian philosophers in combined efforts. The monk Thomas of Aquinas in the 1200s took a central step by snagging Aristotle´s First Cause argument that he had developed to answer the question, "Where do all these different causes and effects we see by induction (such as he knew them then (except he oddly argued things such as that movement in curved lines was not possible- see James Hannam´s work) arise?" The First Cause was his deductive conclusion, at first. However, he decided that the Universe was eternal, an assumption which made a First Cause impossible. His other transcendental factor was the Unmoved Mover, whose disconnect disabled further Aristotle´s First Cause. Aquinas revived and elaborated that brilliant reasoning based on Christianity´s coherent assumptions that corresponded then to essential foundations for modernizing philosophy, scientific or natural philosophy as one branch among three. Bishop R Grosseteste was one proto-scientist at the time, no less, and the Bishop of Paris Tempier made an authoritative declaration about God´s omniscience versus Aristotle that shows the reinforcing complex of subgroups in Christian society in Jesus´ legacy. See Stan Jaki for extensive cross-cultural and historical comparative work. Dawkins showed a key philosophical issue when he argued for random mutations and randomness in evolution. The resolution of the issue is very satisfying, since "randomness" lies where, exactly? It is a human projection based on an urge to be able to predict. It expresses the inversion of the person´s being unwilling or unable to be aware that "I don´t know the lawful regularities at play, but I know that lawful regularities are at play." Thus, SJ Gould´s "punctuated equilibrium" didn´t actually oppose "gradual evolutionism," except as egotistical emphasis on polysyllabic phrasings and authorships. Understanding that we are engaged in philosophical hypothesizing and category description, what might be called a "comprehensive assessment of interacting or alternative possibilities " makes both contributing factors coherent, and verifiable. That´s in terms of factors affecting individual and species survival fitness processes. Human development operates at multiple pre- and historical levels, cultural, biographical developmental, and now University-based and complex psychological diverse forms. Piaget´s pioneering child and developmental work makes a great reference, although the combination of Christian University-based activity, including Luther´s acts that inspired the Reformation are fundamental to address common anti-Christian exclusionary biases, secularist or otherwise. It also reflects the importance of the philosophy of history, as the rationalist J Priestley, Hegel on Spirit over Nature, Wm James on the individual, Josiah Royce on the beloved community, and Rickert on History as individualizing, all begin to indicate. It all began paleontologically and paleo-archeologically with tool-use, evolution of cognitive-related motor-physiology, and symbolic communication in groups. Ironically, modern sustainability concerns are coherent with classic concerns about "salvation" and "apocalypse." Survival of the fittest, whether by the valuing of spiritual philosophy or its context in Jesus´ loving theistic legacy, is ultimately not simply "scientific" in nature, but urgently metaphysical, in fact, seen in full. Perhaps you might agree with me on that latter point, not least of all.