My View , (This is my opinion so if it offends I apologize).

1. In my opinion, I believe that people are interesting emotional beings. We were placed on this earth by God and given His commandments to follow, but in the end, we end up letting our wants and desires drive us and become victims to sin. God gave us the power to choose, he gave us the ability to reason and be competent of the world around us; as weak enslaved beings to our desires we often want more and do the opposite of what we are told. God placed Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden and gave them many types of fruits to eat minus just one type of fruit from one tree. He told them not to eat from it, and they did. This made sin enter the world and causethe fall of mankind. It seems to be a trend that people do not like authority, all though we are here to please God. People want to rule themselves and everyone wants to be on top. I should correct the statement I just made; everyone wants to be on top with as little work as possible. This is why we throw away religion because it’s just “too hard” to follow the laws set before us by God. When I say that humans are emotional beings I mean that we are all driven by our emotions. When we are angry we yell and fight, when we are sad we cry,etc. Though this is true I believe we are all spiritual although many reject the idea of God and accept the love of science. We are born into sin, but we have the option to find salvation. We give into the earthly pleasures and riches around us which makes us fall short of the kingdom of heaven. The Bible says, “Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God” (Matt. 19;24). The world is based on many superficialities, which is making it harder for people to see the real purpose of life, to carry out God’s will and love him. God gives us the free will to choose to be with Him or without Him. So, we all have free will to choose how we want to live, however we will all be judged in the end. God is our destiny and our truth.

I believe we were born into this world with a purpose and we live our lives trying to fulfill this purpose. We are taught through nurture of our families (they play a vital role), and helped by our genetics. When we are of age to reason and no longer depend on our parents we must all live by faith trusting that God will always prepare the way and help us live out his will for us. Don’t you realize something? The people who don’t turn to religion are the ones who are always questioning things. It is those who treat religion as the physical and not the spiritual who are always wondering why they are on earth? What is their purpose? It is always the ones who are scientifically endowed, who are always searching for the reason we are here instead of searching how to better themselves to gain salvation. Those who are connected spiritually and emotionally to God have faith and are looking through their faith to their purpose. These people know that we should live through love, through Christ, through grace to gain salvation. We should all “Do onto others as we would have them do onto us.” We should live by comprehension and trying to look at other peoples’ lives through their glasses. We must give up desires of the flesh, which are keeping us enslaved to this world, and seek forgiveness and love through the spirit.

Women and men are both human with two different roles in life. They are equal and should be treated equally because their potentials are the same. It is hard to put a real label on the sexes because each person has their own drive, which causes them to use a little or all of their potential. Fundamentally, people are looked at both holistically and individually. Due to the sin of Adam and Eve, we do die, and we do know and live in a world of sin. Though God made a holistic choice he looks at us individually also. When judgment day comes, he isn’t going to judge us as a group, he is going to judge us individually of our actions because he believes we are morally responsible for our own sin. The sin of Adam and Eve just made sin enter the world, as humans it is up to us to stray as far away from sin as possible. There is no doubt that we are all interdependent and classified into groups. For example: I am a Jamaican American and belong to the upper-middle class, one can say that that is my group. Individually, I am Michelle Webb. We must know that though we are our own individuals, we must not forget that we depend on others for food, health care, income, etc. For example, we wouldn’t be able to eat if the farmer didn’t raise the cattle, and the manufacturer didn’t kill and package it, and the supermarket didn’t sell it to us. There is no way a man can be “an island.” This is my view on human nature. As you see, I have a strong belief that everything starts and finishes with God. Only through Christ are we living.

Money = life?

I understand that this isn't something we have discussed recently, but I feel the need to blog about this since this can be connected to human nature. Why is it that we are so fascinated with the idea of money? Is it true that money literally makes the world go 'round? I know and understand that we need money to survive, because in this day and age buying things is just the trend. No one hunts and gathers so money is the only way by which we can get our necessities, but is it something that we need to kill and hurt others for? If our daily needs are being met do humans have to be so enslaved to the "green master?" I know the economy right now is in horrible shape and we are in the midst of a recession and looking at the stock prices is just depressing, however why do we need to hurt each other for money? Is it because we are enslaved to our desires, that when we see that there is a possibility of it not being met we just snap and result to immoral acts.
In this case I guess one may not say that we are free. Since the 12th grade studying Kant and Thoreau, I know that we are enslaved to our desires and wants. As humans, its hard to only meet needs because we look at our wants as needs. Think of it, as humans could we do the experiment David Henry Thoreau would we survive? Can we live in the woods away from technology and do our own hunting, cooking, and weaving of clothes? It's interesting that some people live through money and superficial things. When are we going to be free from the illusions of our happiness? When are we going to step out of the cave and into the sunlight? When are we going to live a truly happy life?
The reason this topic came to my mind is that just two or three days ago I was going through a news article online and I saw that a bus driver in my city was killed due to an issue with money. He was stabbed in the chest because he wouldn't give a man on the bus (who didn't pay because he had an insufficient fare on his metro card) a transfer to go onto another bus. The bus driver didn't deserve to lose his life, it was only done because the man didn't have any money and he was denied something. When will things like this stop. A connection between money (or any other superficial thing) and violence can be made. Look at it, in the poor neighborhoods violence and robbery seem to be higher than in well off neighborhoods. Is money and material things that important? Remember material things are not forever. When you die you aren't able to take your 50 million dollars with you. The Bible also says a lot about material objects, it all will pass away someday!

Punishment.

My teacher in one of my classes said something very interesting today that made me think of the topic of punishment on pg 251. As he was explaining the reoccurring theme in movies, he came to the conclusion that in every movie, "Villains have to be punished." On hearing this this instantly reminded me of what I read in chapter 15 and how I felt about it. The book states, "we cannot help but hold people responsible for their actions: they ought to be praised and rewarded for their virtuous actions and blamed and punished for their vicious actions. We may call this the responsibility thesis." The book also gives examples of those who deserved to be punished,"racists who harm others......Adolf Hitler and his Nazi followers." I agree to the fullest with these statements. I do believe that the unjust/immoral acts of others should be punished and thy should do hard time for hurting/offending people. This is why we have time out and "spankings" for children and prison for adult offenders. The point that I am slowly driving to is; since it is OK for people who do crimes to do the time; morally is it right for humans to enforce the death penalty?
There are many states that use the death penalty, whether it be the lethal injection,electrocution, gas chamber, hanging, or even firing squad. Are we authorized as humans to kill another human? Why not let them stay in confinement for life instead of taking their life as their punishment? Why do they want to play God? I believe in punishment for crimes, but there is no justification for killing people at all!

Free Will.

I have started reading chapter 15 and so far I find it interesting to see the duel views of free will. If I had to pick a side as to where I stand, I would say I agree with the Libertarians view that we do have free will. I believe that we are all responsible for our actions, granted that we are in sound mind. The only way person isn't in charge of their action is if they are mentally/ emotionally unstable; other than that we do have free will. Even believing in God, you have your free will to choose if you want to do whats morally right or morally wrong. Many people think that you are not free because God supposedly "brainwashes" you to do what He wants; not the case. God loves us and does have our will set out for us, but He makes us choose whether to follow Him or not. This choice was due to the fact that Adam and Eve ate the apple and "their eyes were open," forcing them to know the difference between good and evil.
We have a free will to choose our actions as long as we are ready to take responsibility for them in the end and not make excuses. Now that I think about it, it seems like existentialists and determinist's would be great enemies since they have conflicting views. In what I read so far I can only see the determinist's as excuse makers, using past events/ancestors always as an excuse to get out of the consequences of their actions. To clarify my self even further, I do believe in involuntary actions as well as voluntary actions. If we have to think and reason about something and come to a conclusion, that is a voluntary action. If our body does something without us thinking then that is a involuntary action. Being hungry is involuntary, because we do not think about being hungry it just happens. Whether we eat or not (or even what we choose to eat) is voluntary because it takes reasoning and deliberating.
Another thing stated by the determinist's that I want to clarify is the subject of want and desire. OK, we cannot help the things that we find appealing and that is arousing to us, but we do choose as to whether we give into our desire or not. If a person placed a huge chocolate cheesecake in front of me and they know that is my weakness, the cheesecake is something I really want, but I know if I eat it I will get fat it is up to me whether I give into my want or my reason. I could show weakness and indulge or I could show discipline and walk away. The same can go for any desire people have. It's their choice. Free will is free will!

Superiority

"The infirm or the stupid should be sterilized so their genes are not passed on,"this was a statement made by Darwin. This strikes me as a negative thought that may have been used as one of the justifications for many evil things done in the world. As soon as I read this I thought of Hitler's take on ethnic cleansing and his belief that the Aryan race was superior. This also puts me in the mind of slavery and how many people may use this as their reason as to why they enslaved those "under them. I do not believe anyone should be sterilized and that anyone is stupid and weak. Everyone is human, and everyone (though may not be equal in strength and knowledge) is equal in their right to live and breed.
Another thing that bothers me is this Survival of the Fittest thing. I think just hearing this theory creates a superiority complex in people making them think that they have all right to live, but they can do w/o the people who are "beneath them." Isn't this theory saying that one person has more value than the other? Can anyone be called less fit to survive? We are all created equally to carry out our purpose, but then Darwin states that people should be sterilized and the fit will only survive; why and how did he come to this conclusion? Darwin did take a great leap to press on a seriously touchy issue. This doesn't only denies the role of God but it blatantly tells those who have been sick most of their life that the reason why they are sick and are going to die is because they are not fit to survive. They have no reason to breed; they need to be sterilized. They are an unequal to the healthy "superior" person. I don't understand. Maybe I am not understanding what Darwin meant. I don't get it. :-x

Evolution and Ethics

First I just want to state my opinion on Darwin's theories (again). I don't know who I thinks is more absurd Nietzsche's or Darwin's. I mean this is just my opinion; I know there are people out there who agree with Darwin, but I fail to see how I come from a baboon or monkey or whatever he says we evolved from.
Now that got that out of my system, I wanted to take a closer look at the at pages 217-219 which talks about ethics. I do not understand what Pojman is trying to get across. He tells us about three types of birds, who usually attract parasites and the only way to free themselves of the parasites is to clean themselves. Technically they cannot literally clean themselves, but they rely on other birds to clean them. I see a connection to humans we don't rely on others to clean us, however, we do rely on other people to survive. Now these "birds" have three different personality traits; the sucker (who cleans everyone whether they reciprocate or not), the cheater (who never cleans any other bird but expects other birds to clean them) and the grudgers (who as their name implies only cleans those who cleans them and holds grudges against the cheaters). Since I believe the birds are suppose to represent a community of people which the book says that the suckers are the Christians, being totally altruistic, what is Dawkins implying? Is humanity suppose to be grudgers? Why are the Christians labeled as the suckers? Is it because we believe in love for all no matter what they have done to us? Why is that so wrong? Should we only do good deeds as long as we get something in return? Only do things for gain and not for the morality we hold? This is what I do not understand. I believe that good deeds should be rewarded on occasion, but don't let that be the only reason you do something. Do things because you know its morally right, not for fame or fortune. For the bad you do, yea you should be punished. I don't know, all I do know is that I found this interesting and it sparked many questions for me.

Religion, Evolution, and Evil!

OK, so I began reading the chapter on Darwin and I just have one thing to say...........what? I do not understand any of this evolutionary mumbo jumbo and the parts that I do understand are just going against creationism. I have talked to many people and when we do end up talking about Christianity , someone always says there is no room for Christianity anymore because so many people aren't acknowledging God as the creator of the Universe and everything in it, but they always turn to Science. There was a movie made a few years back called "The Reaping," and in this movie there was a scientist who was once a Christian, but then rejected the faith because of a personal problem that happened to her. As a Christian friend was talking to her he told her to explain all the plagues that happened in the bible when Moses asked Pharaoh to let his people go. Within less than a minute she gave a scientific explanation for all the plagues that happened, ruling out any possible involvement that God had. I was really shocked, but back to evolution. I so not believe I cam from a monkey. OK so there have been tests and research and data that shows humans and chimpanzees have almost identical genetic structure. OK and?
I was never big on this whole big bang/ evolutionary theory and I still am not. Maybe that is why I am having such a hard time with this chapter. What really set me of is that on pg 211, it states, " whereas religious accounts of the origin of evil have less impressive credentials." How dare they!? Then Pojman go on to question God and Him not being "more efficient." I mean come on, it was said in this chapter that the evolutionary theories have little proof.
Even though science and Christianity and all of these other theories differ, I must say that I did find one interlacing fact ( yea I was surprised). The bible says, "The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak." Jesus also says to make sure not to get caught up in the things of this world. Giving into the things of the world and bodily desires is what causes sin and greed and many of the philosophers agree with this. It is because of a persons wants and desires and their yearning to fulfill these wants and desires that there is evil. In this chapter it says, "Much, if not most, of moral or human made evil is the "unintended" result of nature's making us creatures with insatiable wants but limited resources and sympathies." I interpret this as due to the desires of man, evil (sin) is the result. That is the only underlying theme that I see between philosophy and religion.
I will try my best to finish this chapter, but like I said before it is hard to understand. I am trying my best to be patient, but it is just a fact of the matter that I don't believe in this and they are bashing religion harshly.