I have mentioned before, subjective opinion, like to say something is beautiful, is an inherently creationist concept. Much time is spent exploring the scientific method, objectivity and fact. It is only right that a little time should be spent exploring subjectivity, opinion.
How it figures that subjective opinion is a creationist concept is; choosing is the mechanism of creation, and a subjective opinion is formed by choice, and expresses what it is that makes a choice.
Here you can see subjective opinion validated in the creationist conceptual scheme:
1.Creator / chooses / spiritual / existence of which is a matter of chosen opinion
2. Creation / chosen / material / existence of which is a matter of fact forced by evidence
In category 1 subjective opinions are validated.
To apply creationism to people, then we must consider people as being a creator, and people as being a creation. As a creator a human being makes choices. Emotions provide motivation to choices, they help make choices, and therefore emotions are in category 1. That means the existence of emotions is a matter of chosen opinion. It is your chosen opinion whether someone chooses out of love or hate. Either chosen opinion is equally logically valid. That an opinion is logically valid does not mean the opinion is morally upright. It only means the opinion obeys the rules of subjectivity, which rules are that an opinion must be chosen, and must express what it is that makes a choice.
Category number 2 in the creationist conceptual scheme deals with facts, which is basically the same as in the scientific method. The body and brain are people as being a creation, and facts applies to it.
Every subjective word we use in common discourse like beautiful, nice, ugly, etc. they all use the same logic that they must be used by choice, and must express what it is that makes a choice. The name God and the word soul are also subjective, because they are both defined in terms of that they make choices.
The situation in the world today is that everyone hates subjectivity. People naturally hate it, but this is made all the worse by science, and especially by evolution theory. It is obvious that denial of creationism leads directly to rejection of subjectivity, because subjectivity is a creationist concept, and evolution theory stands in denial of creationism.
Now all people still have intuitive understanding of subjectivity. Everyone knows how to use a word like beautiful in common discourse, eventhough intellectually not being aware that subjective words are chosen and express what it is that makes a choice. So there are factors which contibute to our comprehension of subjectivity, like our built in intuitive understanding, and factors which undermine our comprehension of subjectivity, like evolution theory.
It is no coincedence that atheism, materialism, social darwinism, racism are associated to evolution theory. This is because
1. In evolution theory subjective words are used in an objectified way, like differential reproductive "success", "beneficial" mutations, "struggling for" survival
2. Evolution theory is in opposition to creationism / intelligent design, while subjective opinion is a creationist concept.
People are driven to atheism by evolution theory throwing out creationism, and thereby throwing out subjectivity. You can recognize these kinds of atheists by that they ask for evidence of God.
Racism is mostly based on the idea that content of character is material, factual, and heritable. As content of character is about what makes a choice, it is therefore a matter of chosen opinion what the content of someone's character is (judgement). So most racism is actually based on a logical error.
Social darwinism is also very obviously a direct result of evolution theory. Because all that use of subjective terminology in evolution theory, naturally leads to make moral opinion based on it. And if you would then say, that is not the intended meaning of evolution theory, that is actually not really true. Because in the denial of creationism is also the denial of proper subjective moral opinion. So then the evolutionist "success" "benefit" "struggle for" becomes to be the factual morality.
Evolution theory therefore is a theory the adoption of which leads to personal and societal catastrophy, through the theory undermining subjectivity.
It is difficult to estimate the extent of the damage evolution theory is causing. But obvious things like that the nazi schoolbook for the Hitler Youth taught about natural selection as designating worth, and regarding content of character as a factual issue, should be considered as evidence.
Really, if a considerable number of creationists would emphasize this point that subjectivity is a creationist concept, and educate people about how subjectivity works, then much damage could be averted. But actually many creationists also reject subjectivity. Regardless of the emphasis on faith in religion, they just assert it is all factual.
And this is why I am a pessimist for the future. Although catastrophy could be "easily" averted by educating people about how subjectivity works, so I am optimist in the sense that at any moment we could steer the ship away from catastrophy.
How it figures that subjective opinion is a creationist concept is; choosing is the mechanism of creation, and a subjective opinion is formed by choice, and expresses what it is that makes a choice.
Here you can see subjective opinion validated in the creationist conceptual scheme:
1.Creator / chooses / spiritual / existence of which is a matter of chosen opinion
2. Creation / chosen / material / existence of which is a matter of fact forced by evidence
In category 1 subjective opinions are validated.
To apply creationism to people, then we must consider people as being a creator, and people as being a creation. As a creator a human being makes choices. Emotions provide motivation to choices, they help make choices, and therefore emotions are in category 1. That means the existence of emotions is a matter of chosen opinion. It is your chosen opinion whether someone chooses out of love or hate. Either chosen opinion is equally logically valid. That an opinion is logically valid does not mean the opinion is morally upright. It only means the opinion obeys the rules of subjectivity, which rules are that an opinion must be chosen, and must express what it is that makes a choice.
Category number 2 in the creationist conceptual scheme deals with facts, which is basically the same as in the scientific method. The body and brain are people as being a creation, and facts applies to it.
Every subjective word we use in common discourse like beautiful, nice, ugly, etc. they all use the same logic that they must be used by choice, and must express what it is that makes a choice. The name God and the word soul are also subjective, because they are both defined in terms of that they make choices.
The situation in the world today is that everyone hates subjectivity. People naturally hate it, but this is made all the worse by science, and especially by evolution theory. It is obvious that denial of creationism leads directly to rejection of subjectivity, because subjectivity is a creationist concept, and evolution theory stands in denial of creationism.
Now all people still have intuitive understanding of subjectivity. Everyone knows how to use a word like beautiful in common discourse, eventhough intellectually not being aware that subjective words are chosen and express what it is that makes a choice. So there are factors which contibute to our comprehension of subjectivity, like our built in intuitive understanding, and factors which undermine our comprehension of subjectivity, like evolution theory.
It is no coincedence that atheism, materialism, social darwinism, racism are associated to evolution theory. This is because
1. In evolution theory subjective words are used in an objectified way, like differential reproductive "success", "beneficial" mutations, "struggling for" survival
2. Evolution theory is in opposition to creationism / intelligent design, while subjective opinion is a creationist concept.
People are driven to atheism by evolution theory throwing out creationism, and thereby throwing out subjectivity. You can recognize these kinds of atheists by that they ask for evidence of God.
Racism is mostly based on the idea that content of character is material, factual, and heritable. As content of character is about what makes a choice, it is therefore a matter of chosen opinion what the content of someone's character is (judgement). So most racism is actually based on a logical error.
Social darwinism is also very obviously a direct result of evolution theory. Because all that use of subjective terminology in evolution theory, naturally leads to make moral opinion based on it. And if you would then say, that is not the intended meaning of evolution theory, that is actually not really true. Because in the denial of creationism is also the denial of proper subjective moral opinion. So then the evolutionist "success" "benefit" "struggle for" becomes to be the factual morality.
Evolution theory therefore is a theory the adoption of which leads to personal and societal catastrophy, through the theory undermining subjectivity.
It is difficult to estimate the extent of the damage evolution theory is causing. But obvious things like that the nazi schoolbook for the Hitler Youth taught about natural selection as designating worth, and regarding content of character as a factual issue, should be considered as evidence.
Really, if a considerable number of creationists would emphasize this point that subjectivity is a creationist concept, and educate people about how subjectivity works, then much damage could be averted. But actually many creationists also reject subjectivity. Regardless of the emphasis on faith in religion, they just assert it is all factual.
And this is why I am a pessimist for the future. Although catastrophy could be "easily" averted by educating people about how subjectivity works, so I am optimist in the sense that at any moment we could steer the ship away from catastrophy.
