4 ms·

> I think it is fair to say that belief (or disbelief) in God is a foundational human issue. I think it is quite a bit of a stretch to call something a foundat

> I think it is fair to say that belief (or disbelief) in God is a foundational human issue. I think it is quite a bit of a stretch to call something a foundational human issue when there is no consensus agreement as to what the words involved even mean, even among members of the same sect. If you could define the term 'God' in a meaningful way which all humans agreed upon, then we could maybe start to discuss whether belief in God were a foundational human issue. As it stands currently, the phrase 'God exists' is nothing but a shibboleth.

bargl 13y ago
I think that the fact that people have been looking for meaning to their existence in God, Gods or other higher beings for years even when separated by oceans shows that this is a fundamental human issue. While the execution of this is different in many ways, monothiestic - polythiestic it does show that human beings strive for a knowledge about things that are beyond our understanding. And it isn't like there haven't been Athiests all along http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_atheism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_atheism. I think that this shows that the curiosity of "where do we come from" is fundamentally built into the human psyche.
- nbouscal 13y ago
  I agree that there are many questions that any given human will be very likely to ask itself at some point in its life, and perhaps to dwell upon at some length. The example you gave of "Where do we come from?" is one, along with "Why am I here?", "What am I meant to do?", and many others. Where I disagree is your leap from those questions to some notion of a "higher being". First, as mentioned previously, this term is undefined and you cannot have a meaningful conversation without defining the terms. Second, we have already answered some of the "big questions". We know where we come from: billions of years of evolution through natural selection. No "higher beings" necessary. And third, for the questions that still lack satisfactory answers, in most cases that is because they are wrong questions (http://lesswrong.com/lw/og/wrong_questions/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/og/wrong_questions/). There may very well be "big questions" that actually merit being asked and that may rightly be considered foundational human issues, but that does not by any means lead to the conclusion that the question of the existence of some undefined "higher being" is a foundational human issue.
  - mseebach 13y ago
    The idea, much less the concrete evidence, that science (evolution) can explain everything is about five minutes old compared to humanity - and humanity has looked to the super-natural to answer the big questions for as long as they have been able to express those questions. It doesn't get much more fundamental than that.
    - nbouscal 13y ago
      Fundamental does not mean old, it means essential. Age has very little to do with it. Never leaving Earth is a part of human life as old as humanity itself, and yet we have proven that it is not an essential one.
  - icebraining 13y ago
    Saying that evolutions answers where we come from is a little like traveling to another country, and when a local asks "where did you come from?" answering "the airport".
    - nbouscal 13y ago
      It sounds like you're looking for an answer to a question more like "Where did the universe come from?" That's an entirely different question.
      - icebraining 13y ago
        We're part of the universe, so that question is still contained in "where have we come from," at least from some values of "we". But even after that, there's still the appearance of life in the universe and the appearance of life on Earth.

bargl 13y ago

I think that the fact that people have been looking for meaning to their existence in God, Gods or other higher beings for years even when separated by oceans shows that this is a fundamental human issue. While the execution of this is different in many ways, monothiestic - polythiestic it does show that human beings strive for a knowledge about things that are beyond our understanding. And it isn't like there haven't been Athiests all along http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_atheism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_atheism. I think that this shows that the curiosity of "where do we come from" is fundamentally built into the human psyche.

nbouscal 13y ago
I agree that there are many questions that any given human will be very likely to ask itself at some point in its life, and perhaps to dwell upon at some length. The example you gave of "Where do we come from?" is one, along with "Why am I here?", "What am I meant to do?", and many others. Where I disagree is your leap from those questions to some notion of a "higher being". First, as mentioned previously, this term is undefined and you cannot have a meaningful conversation without defining the terms. Second, we have already answered some of the "big questions". We know where we come from: billions of years of evolution through natural selection. No "higher beings" necessary. And third, for the questions that still lack satisfactory answers, in most cases that is because they are wrong questions (http://lesswrong.com/lw/og/wrong_questions/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/og/wrong_questions/). There may very well be "big questions" that actually merit being asked and that may rightly be considered foundational human issues, but that does not by any means lead to the conclusion that the question of the existence of some undefined "higher being" is a foundational human issue.
- mseebach 13y ago
  The idea, much less the concrete evidence, that science (evolution) can explain everything is about five minutes old compared to humanity - and humanity has looked to the super-natural to answer the big questions for as long as they have been able to express those questions. It doesn't get much more fundamental than that.
  - nbouscal 13y ago
    Fundamental does not mean old, it means essential. Age has very little to do with it. Never leaving Earth is a part of human life as old as humanity itself, and yet we have proven that it is not an essential one.
- icebraining 13y ago
  Saying that evolutions answers where we come from is a little like traveling to another country, and when a local asks "where did you come from?" answering "the airport".
  - nbouscal 13y ago
    It sounds like you're looking for an answer to a question more like "Where did the universe come from?" That's an entirely different question.
    - icebraining 13y ago
      We're part of the universe, so that question is still contained in "where have we come from," at least from some values of "we". But even after that, there's still the appearance of life in the universe and the appearance of life on Earth.