/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17266782]

What the fuck is the point of evolving and surviving? Why do the atoms and molecules subject us to this torment?

[Anonymous No.17266807]

There is no point. It's simply a byproduct of existence
If you didn't exist you couldn't ask this question
Therefore you have no alternatives

[Anonymous No.17266827]

>>17266782
no point. it's just that certain things by chance happen to be better at surviving then others, so they do, then they have kids who are better at surviving, and the best of those have more kids, etc.

Your question is essentially, why are there lots of things that like to make more of themselves, and not many things that don't like making more of themselves?

[Anonymous No.17266831]

[Anonymous No.17266846]

>>17266782
What? No, anon. Life is a blessing.

[Anonymous No.17266886]

>>17266782
“ I don’t understand why some people love nature. The only thing I see in nature? Countless mechanisms whose only purpose is to consume energy and reproduce, inflicting and receiving suffering endlessly.

Maybe this is one reason why I despise god. His creations are sadistic.

If the birds don’t kill the butterfly, the birds will suffer due to starvation. If the birds kill the butterfly, the butterfly will get torn apart and will suffer.

The mouse will consume whatever it can get to prevent suffering from hunger, the human will do whatever it can to protect its food from disease.

Can you blame them though? They’re just trying to survive, humanity has conquered the world, monopolizing all resources.

Every organism wants to survive and reproduce by any means necessary, even if it harms another.

Even plants compete for resources like sunlight and water, large ones thrive, weak ones perish.

Something feels very, very wrong with this world.

But organisms continue to live anyway. Why is that? It feels almost as if they’re forced to live by the primal directives set in their DNAs to avoid death, reproduce and live no matter what.

Or maybe they don’t have the intelligence necessary to ponder about their existence. I wonder what will happen if livestock in slaughterhouses gain such intelligence. Will they rebel in vain? Or commit suicide?

Something about life itself just doesn’t feel right. Existence is filled with suffering.”

[Anonymous No.17267825]

>>17266827
>why are there lots of things that like to make more of themselves, and not many things that don't like making more of themselves?
There are few things that like to replicate themselves, and a universe full of happy generally unchanging matter

[Anonymous No.17267882]

Cause

It’s cool n shit

[Anonymous No.17267911]

>>17266782
atheist propaganda

[Anonymous No.17268060]

>>17266846
some days it don't feel like it though

[Anonymous No.17268082]

>>17266782
There isn’t a point, it just happens, and then mutations happen and mutations that are favourable lead eventually to new species and so on and so on until we reached here

[Anonymous No.17268091]

>>17268082
do people really believe this bullshit?

[Anonymous No.17268100]

>>17268091
tfw retards online memed you into being a based trad christian so you have to deny natural selection

[Anonymous No.17268102]

>>17268091
Yes.

[Anonymous No.17268112]

>>17268060
That is what makes it interesting, anon. I would rather kill myself than be bland.

[Anonymous No.17268114]

>>17268091
Certainly more believable than christcuckery since we actually have evidence.

[Anonymous No.17268118]

>>17266782
There is no sentience without adversity

[Anonymous No.17268123]

>>17268118
why is sentience desirable?

[Anonymous No.17268135]

>>17266782
either no reason or because our creator was an asshole who couldn't be bothered with obvious responsibilities of creating a universe.

[Anonymous No.17268167]

>>17268114
I’ve never seen a single shred of evidence for macro-evolution and it’s not because I haven’t looked. There’s not a single documented instance of one species turning into another species, only of variation within species.
Plus neo-Darwinism is mathematically impossible, read pic related.

[Anonymous No.17268200]

>>17268167
How old is the universe?

[Anonymous No.17268801]

>>17268123
what is desirable without sentience?

[Anonymous No.17268836]

>>17266827
This is the answer but it needs to be fleshed out. For an atheist, you must worship life as the marvelously strange thing that it is

[Anonymous No.17268888]

>>17266782
OP asked a good question and everyone misses the point.

>>17266807
> a byproduct of existence
Why is it a byproduct of existence? Show that this is true
Why does existence exist?

>>17266827
Why are some things better at surviving then others?
Why is surviving and "reproducing" a concept that even exists?

>>17267911
>>17268091
Why does God exist?

[Anonymous No.17268892]

>>17268060
You can always take the Stoic pill.

[Anonymous No.17268932]

>>17268888
these questions are not very good, anon. why are circles not squares? if [paradox] happens, how?

[Anonymous No.17268986]

>>17268888
>Why are some things better at surviving than others?
Because they're different, so they have different odds of survival. If two odds are different, one must be greater, the other lesser
>Why is surviving and "reproducing" a concept
because all biological life we've observed so far dies. Therefore, anything that doesn't reproduce ceases to exist pretty quickly.

[Anonymous No.17268998]

>>17266782
information that replicates itself has a higher chance of continuing to exist than information that does not, it's that simple

[Anonymous No.17269000]

>>17266782
What I always find funny about these images is they go straight from ape to white man, but humans first evolved in Africa and were black, white man came much later.

[Anonymous No.17269001]

>>17268888
What is the nature of Time?
Until you can grapple with this fundamental force, you can fuck right off with this "What about ____, what about _____?" bullshit.

[Anonymous No.17269002]

>>17266886
From which book is this taken from

[Anonymous No.17269009]

>>17269002
My Diary Desu (2002) by Anon

[Anonymous No.17269016]

>>17268932
there is no paradox though.

>>17268986
i realize now you're talking within the scope of evolution and i'm thinking the scope of thermodynamics.

why is there a force that counteracts entropy (albeit in a closed system)? why are there forces to begin with (e.g. EM, gravity, strong / weak nuclear) and why are these forces the main source of "energy" working against entropy?

[Anonymous No.17269029]

>>17269001
time isn't a fundamental force (at least not that scientists have realized yet). nevertheless, i don't know what your bar is for "grappling" with a concept before i can satisfy it. so whatever.

[Anonymous No.17269039]

>>17269029
>time isn't a fundamental force
Confirmed midwit thread. Have fun kids.

[Anonymous No.17269065]

>>17269039
a major lesson in every adults' life is learning to admit when they're wrong

[Anonymous No.17269095]

>>17268167
>This book written by some midwit who doesn't have a qualification in biology and chemistry disproves the theories defended by biologists and chemists who have been testing and studying them for over 100 years

[Anonymous No.17269109]

>>17268167
brings me back to the days i used to binge thunderf00t and aronra dunking on christian pseudoscientists like this author. good times

[Anonymous No.17269134]

>>17269095
le official qualifications
that's like saying how dare you question God when you aren't even an ordained priest

[Anonymous No.17269150]

>>17268888
>Why does existence exist?
http://immortality-roadmap.com/universeorigin7.pdf

[Anonymous No.17269158]

>>17269134
not having official qualitifications is fine as long as he addresses the canon of scientific literature.

but ignoring what others have written, straw-manning them weakly, and coming up with a weak "theory" that can never be falsified, that's pseud

[Anonymous No.17269177]

>>17269134
You don't need to be a priest to understand theology. That only requires being trained in epistemology which doesn't require a laboratory and empirical evidence. When I was like 18, I learnt epistemology by myself, walked into my local priest and debated him. I pretty much nailed that debate and the guy told me to leave. He was in his 60s or something lol

[Anonymous No.17269224]

>>17268167
There is no macro/micro divide, its all just mutation. 'Macro' as you would describe it is just a bunch of 'micro' over a long period of time

[Anonymous No.17269227]

>When I was like 18, I learnt epistemology by myself, walked into my local priest and debated him. I pretty much nailed that debate and the guy told me to leave. He was in his 60s or something lol

[Anonymous No.17269297]

>>17269224
>>17269177
>>17269109
>>17268200
>>17268167
>>17268114

Is the conscious reducible?

Some coincidences are basically impossible.

Science can explain what happens in natural phenomena but it can't explain why the conditions arose to create the natural phenomena.

The science community isn't decentralized look at Stanley Meyer.

[Anonymous No.17269783]

>>17269297
reddit

spacing

[Anonymous No.17269967]

finding more dogmatic and illogical assertions here by neodarwinists than in any religion. another difference is crucial: the latter have a fundamental goal for survival, stability, peace and order. the former is supported by a literal cult on the foundations of the latter.

[Anonymous No.17270636]

>>17268167
I read once an article about an island way down in the south seas where there were almost no flying insects. I believe they found the same insect species we know but incapable of flight. This was due to the strong winds, common in this latitude, that would take hold of insects mid-air and carry them to the open sea, where they died. They evolved, because those less prone to fly would carry their genes.

[Anonymous No.17270659]

>>17266782
Because someone wished it so.

[Anonymous No.17270786]

>>17269009
lololol my diary desu funny joke

[Anonymous No.17270825]

>>17269297
> Some coincidences are basically impossible.
literally every coincidence that's ever happened was possible (otherwise it wouldn't have happened)

> but it can't explain why the conditions arose to create the natural phenomena.
Science and evolution don't try to answer the "why". This is a bait and switch. Criticism of evolution can only be targeted at the "how", because that's all evolution tries to answer.

[Anonymous No.17270857]

>>17268167
>There’s not a single documented instance of one species turning into another species, only of variation within species.
That's because it takes millions of years. And yet, obviously there is a reason why so many different species share similar organs, like eyeballs.

[Anonymous No.17271303]

>>17270857
Bullshit, man "evolved" from apes and yet there are a ton of monkeys still alive. Checkmate Atheists.

[Anonymous No.17271359]

>>17269783
So your ADHD brain can understand and doesn't get overwhelmed by the changing of topics.

>>17270825
>literally every coincidence that's ever happened was possible (otherwise it wouldn't have happened)

-Basically > .000000001%

>Science and evolution don't try to answer the "why".
Because that leads to paradigm shifts.

>Criticism of evolution can only be targeted at the "how"

I am not attacking evolution I said "Science .... but it can't.....". I am attacking the centralized, double edged, monopolized, scientific community. There is control over what gets funded>published>taught.

[Anonymous No.17271613]

>>17271303
>and yet there are a ton of monkeys still alive
Rude. Call them Christians like the rest of civil society.

[Anonymous No.17272608]

>>17268888
Existence. Ok? Only option.

[Anonymous No.17273143]

>>17268888
>OP asked a good question

no, he asked a meaningless, moronic question as bait. that he got more than 0 responses makes me sad as to the state of /lit/

[Anonymous No.17273190]

>>17266782
Because.