Comments on: Good, Evil, and Evolution

By: poeticinterconnections

poeticinterconnections — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 23:09:59 +0000

Thank you for your comment, Christy, and your correction! I’m hoping this blog contributes, if even a little, to the spirituality/science balance you’re seeking. Looking forward to hearing from you again, in response to future posts.

By: Christy

Christy — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:56:56 +0000

I meant to state that I felt this connection between spirituality and science, not religion and science – I have just been involved in a debate about the difference between religion and spirituality, and can’t believe I made the typo/mistake in my comment!

By: Christy

Christy — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:55:35 +0000

I definitely think it’s time we consider some cooperation (between religion and science). I’ve been searching for many years for a balance between the two…I feel such an interconnection between them that grows ever stronger as I go along my path…

By: poeticinterconnections

poeticinterconnections — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 04:29:11 +0000

Thank you for your comment, Laurel. Your distinction about Yetzer HaTov and Yatzer HaRa is on-point and contributes another dimension to my analogy, allowing me to rewrite a key sentence in my blog post this way:

“Only a dynamic balance of carnality and spirituality, lust and grace, creates an environment in which we can evolve, and keep evolving.”

Sorry I missed the opportunity to meet you Sunday, and hope to remedy that next time I’m at JAI.

By: poeticinterconnections

poeticinterconnections — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 04:16:57 +0000

You caught me! I overly generalized about complexity theorists, and stand corrected.

I like your description of consciousness as “a container for perception of all kinds.” I wish I’d been at Burning Man to take in the symposium.

By: Laurel Paley

Laurel Paley — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 02:02:32 +0000

Sorry I missed the Artist Beit Midrash. I wanted to go but couldn’t make it. AND it is a pleasure to read your reflections here.

The “Yetzer HaRa” is more along the lines of our “base” inclination (not simply our “evil” inclination). This as opposed to the “Yetzer HaTov,” the “higher” inclination. The “yetzer hara” is the source of our sexuality, for example. We MUST have and acknowledge both for our survival, but human beings create ways to elevate and contain aspects of our “yetzer hara” for good purpose (hence religious ritual, mitzvot, etc.). Much of our evolution has risen from the purely primal “yetzer hara.”

By: Michael Garfield

Michael Garfield — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 18:31:30 +0000

Adam, only SOME complexity theorists consider consciousness to be emergent…here, we’re not confusing consciousness with self-reflexive thought, but as the container for perception of all kinds, in which case it’s a dimension of every level of organization. Plus, complexity is relative to the observer.

And Leanne, thought creates existence, but existence creates thought, too. Where do you think you got that idea?

I gave a related lecture at Burning Man this year. More on this here:

http://evolution.bandcamp.com/album/entheon-biology-symposium-2009

By: poeticinterconnections

poeticinterconnections — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:01:29 +0000

Thank you for your comment, Leanne, and for continuing the conversation with your statement that thought creates existence. It’s a basic spiritual notion, of course, and contemporary science has interesting things to say about it. Some interpreters of quantum theory believe consciousness (thought) is the primary substance of our universe, giving rise to the particles and atoms of which we’re made. But then complexity theorists consider consciousness/thought to be an emergent phenomenon, appearing only after systems of particles and atoms grow sufficiently complex.

Definitely food for thought!

By: Leanne Crawford

Leanne Crawford — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:19:17 +0000

Food for thought. I believe people are inherently good and I am sticking to that, as thought creates existence.