Interesting

I agree. I think that is where the "awkward phrasing" was coming in. If a genetic mutation proves to be an adaptive enhancement for a population group then that genetic profile is much more likely to proliferate itself. The actual act of breeding will not ensure this occurs.

Oh and on an unrelated side note, that squirrel has rather disproportionate testes.

Thomas I feel as though I understood the point you were trying to make but perhaps it was simply worded awkwardly. No, humans are not directly responsible for their own evolution. No animal is. However to say that humans are in no way inspired or drawn to procreation with certain individuals based on specific genetic factors and requirements, is also incorrect in my opinion. I just feel two sides here ignoring one another.

I think human females will in fact gravitate to certain men that on a purely biological level, offer their offspring the absolute best shot at passing on those physical traits to be successful in the world. This occurs on an unconscious and a conscious level. However the problem is that the traits that human females look for today in males may have not changed very dramatically over the past 500,000 years. So what we desire and feel to be important physical attributes may not be as significant as they once were in today's world.

Wait a minute, what are pheromones? They are invisible chemical signals sent from one individual to another which affect behavior. Actually studies now successfully argue their influence over meaningful behaviors once thought to be completely controlled by conscious personal choice, such as sexual willingness and attraction. They also introduce the possibility that we may be constantly communicating with each other and making interpersonal judgments of which we are unaware. The possible implications of this invisible sense are significant and far-reaching. I would say this definitely has some effect on our choice of sexual partner.

I would consider anything not of Judaic/Christian origin to be Pagan. I found this on Wikipedia and I would agree with this definition.

Paganism (from Latin paganus, meaning "country dweller, rustic") is the blanket term given to describe religions and spiritual practices of pre-Christian Europe, and by extension a term for polytheistic traditions or folk religion worldwide seen from a Western or Christian viewpoint. The term has various different meanings, though, from a Western perspective, it has modern connotations of a faith that has polytheistic, spiritualist, animistic or shamanic practices, such as a folk religion, historical polytheistic or neopagan religion.

Mirror Mirror Im not sure I understand. All of these earlier cultures were pagan at one point and practiced pagan observances of the Solstices and Equinoxes. They did this long before the period of time that Jesus existed. Christianity is about 2000 years old...

I would agree that the human brain has a much older amygdala with the much newer neocortex built over the top of it. Perhaps the conflict between the amygdala and the neocortex can explain why we humans enjoy rollercoasters and horror movies. Of course neither activity is really dangerous. Intellectually we know this, but we feel a sense of accomplishment when we overcome the primitive amygdala to get on the ride.

I said some cultures...and then I used the Catholics as an example.

I think "closed minded" is a title that is normally said in anger when someone just refuses to agree with you on forum or even hear you out or try to comprehend what you saying. So out of nothing more than frustration people will accuse you of being "closed minded."

But are you really?

I think close minded might actually mean anyone who just wont agree.

I was kind of wondering about that also and that is why I didnt respond right away. When people use the expression, "wrestling with demons" it generally means they have some kind of a character flaw or addiction or undesirable character trait they need to keep under control.

But on the other hand, some cultures genuinely believe in demonic possession. In fact the Catholics still sort of keep exorcism at the ready but its more of a parlor trick now that can be pulled out every so often.

I would assume the word "god" is short for Goddess? My first guess is that God/Goddess are English in origin but that could be wrong. Now I will need to look it up.

I didnt really have a clear cut example. In order to be considered "closed minded" by someone else, the assumption would need to be that you reject their premise or believe it not to be as valid as whatever you have decided upon.

You can fill in the blanks from there. Whatever two people are going to debate about and on this particular forum, it seems to very often be religion but not always.

I am by no means any kind of expert on this but its one of those topics that warrants years of study and research. I think Europeans do have their own brand of shamanism. It evolved into what we now think of as witchcraft. As a culture, we feared, persecuted and destroyed our shamanic heritage. We had it all along, and we still do, but most fail to recognize it. It has survived in the strains of folk magick and fairy faith practices. It has been revived as one of the strands in the web of contemporary witchcraft.

"A closed mind is about as useful as a closed parachute..."

Im not sure who said that one.

I want to try Jar Jar Binks meat...

I find I stay up much too late most of the time working on this and that on the computer and then I need to get up early in the morning. I dont feel Im exceptionally clever by any stretch of the imagination. Im just one of those people that does not require a great deal of sleep. That might change the older I get however.

Before someone can be considered "close minded" they need to actually accept a certain premise as factual to the exclusion of others or most others. Let's use evolution as an example. If you accept the concept of evolution then its not that you are necessarily close minded to the idea of creationism. Its that nothing has been presented thus far that can significantly rival the concept of evolution.

If something earth shattering were to surface that supported the account depicted in Genesis, then that would be cause for reevaluation in my opinion.

So would that automatically constitute close mindedness? I dont think so.

Its like having two horses in a race and one is several furlongs ahead of the other at this point. The lagging pony would require a feed bag full of crystal meth to catch up...

The term "open minded" is very much subjective. I have known people who claim they are "open minded" as long as nothing you say deviates from their pre-established understanding of the world that surrounds them.

I try to remain open to new concepts but at the same time, I also exercise discernment and I expect certain new ideas to pass a rigorous evaluation process before I accept them to my own satisfaction and move on to something else either related or not.