Atheism - Evolution And God | Sikh Philosophy Network
  • Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
    Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
    Sign up Log in

Atheism Evolution And God

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
Jun 30, 2004
5,029
7,158
Henderson, NV.
Evolution And God: Only 21% Of Americans Believe Humans Evolved Without Divine Guidance​

Posted: 07/23/2013 3:42 pm EDT Updated: 07/23/2013 3:49 pm EDT

Though the number of Americans who believe that human beings evolved without God's influence has increased since 2004, the percentage may still prove surprising to some.

According to a YouGov poll, only 21% of Americans believe that human beings evolved without the involvement of God, and 25% of those surveyed said, "Human beings evolved but God guided this process."

37% of respondents answered that "God created human beings in their present form," in response to the question "Which of the following comes closest to your views on the origin of human beings?"

The research shows a slow change in the national acceptance of evolution, as in 2004 only 13% of Americans said that human beings evolved without God's guidance.

However, the country remains divided on the issue of what to teach in schools, as 40% favor teaching creationism and intelligent design in schools while 32% oppose it and 29% are unsure.

June 21st marked the 88th anniversary of the Scopes Trial, when a Tennessee high school teacher, John Scopes, was tried in 1925 for teaching evolution. The practice was at that time illegal under the Butler Act, which made it unlawful to teach evolution in any state-funded school, but the trial attracted intense national attention and publicized the debate between religious "modernists" and "fundamentalists."

Scopes lost the trial, but it was a watershed moment for America, and teaching evolution in schools became the national norm. More recently the debate has been couched in the terms of the role of religion in the government, with many arguing that the teaching of creationism and intelligent design violates the separation of church and state.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3640658.html

1. What do you understand by intelligent design?

2. If there is intelligent design, does that imply there is also dumb design? What is it?

3. What is the difference between Creationism and Evolution in real terms?

4. Is evolution a theory or a fact?

5. We all evolve from the day we are born in the way of talking, crawling, walking, understanding, learning, unlearning, relearning. These are the facts. What is your opinion about this?

6. Where does Sikhi stand on Creationism, evolution and intelligent design?

7. What is your personal opinion about #6? Please elaborate.

8. Is the insistence on Creationism/Intelligent design the boom or doom of all religions?

9. Or can God and Evolution co-exist in harmony even if they contradict each other?
 

Attachments

angrisha

SPNer
Jun 24, 2010
95
231
33
Canada
Tejwant Singh Ji

This topic to me is an very interesting one, being a part of the scientific community it is one that at some point in the past I have had to deal with. So Im going to attempt to give my take on your question

1. What do you understand by intelligent design?
I believe greatly in intelligent design, beyond simple evolution. The truth is there is so much about the universe that we don't know. It is estimated that we only really understand 4% of the known universe (I also always found it interesting that's really how much we understand about the human mind). But, when you take a look at just the world around us and how perfectly everything seems to fit together its hard to believe that through natural selection alone we would have gotten this far. There are organisms which fit every known (and unknown) niche. So, I think the process of evolution fits into intelligent design... the starting point of Earth as we know it, its a very specific set of circumstances which allowed us to be here today. Every single organism, and living and non-living entity is essentially made up of all of the same molecules with different combinations. So to me, I think that the chances of this happening by 'chance' or evolution alone is hard to completely grasp.

The work in string theory and some other ones these days are challenging what we know about the universe. In addition, there' a theory that I read lately about multiple bangs, not just one.. which would mean that our 'big bang' might have been apart of a series of other bangs.... so the idea of multiple 'universes' arises. The point being, we dont really ever know anything for certain (scientifically)

(Im really not sure if that answered any question you asked, im going to have to think on this more?)





2. If there is intelligent design, does that imply there is also dumb design? What is it?
Im not sure why one must imply the other? I think, for me intelligent design or universal intelligence is something beyond my own understanding. Thus it is more intelligent that my mind is capable of understanding, with its limitations (Kant says we are incapable of understanding the universe because we are incapable of moving past our own perspectives)... so if there is must be a dumb design, it must be one that we humans have decided to make ourselves?



3. What is the difference between Creationism and Evolution in real terms?
It depends how you choose to look at Creationism.. now forgive me if I'm wrong in any of the following....

Creationism, being born and raised in the west has always sorta been associated in my mind with the biblical explanation of the world being created in 7 days. Where, "God" literally created everything that we see. This idea ive always had a problem with for many reasons, which can essentially be its own thread so I will not get into it here....

If we go beyond that idea, there is another idea of abundance that comes forth. My understanding of this is that, the universe or or 'God' is so vast and so plentiful, life couldn't help but be created through him.

Most eastern traditions, including our own do not give such detailed explanation of creation.

Here are couple quick examples (Page 937) SSGS:
ਜੰਤ[/FONT]ਉਪਾਇ[/FONT]ਵਿਚਿ[/FONT]ਪਾਇਅਨੁ[/FONT]ਕਰਤਾ[/FONT]ਅਲਗੁ[/FONT]ਅਪਾਰੁ[/FONT][/FONT]॥[/FONT]੪੯[/FONT]॥[/FONT]
Janṯ upā▫e vicẖ pā▫i▫an karṯā alag apār. ||49||[/FONT]
Forming His creatures, He placed Himself within them; the Creator is unattached and infinite. ||49|[/FONT]


ਸ੍ਰਿਸਟੇ[/FONT]ਭੇਉ[/FONT]ਨ[/FONT]ਜਾਣੈ[/FONT]ਕੋਇ[/FONT][/FONT]॥[/FONT]
Sariste bẖe▫o na jāṇai ko▫e.[/FONT]
No one knows the mystery of the Creator of the World[/FONT]



And page 297




ਆਪਿ[/FONT]ਸਾਚੁ[/FONT]ਧਾਰੀ[/FONT]ਸਭ[/FONT]ਸਾਚੁ[/FONT][/FONT]॥[/FONT]
Āp sācẖ ḏẖārī sabẖ sācẖ.[/FONT]
He Himself is True, and all that He has established is True.[/FONT]
ਓਤਿ[/FONT]ਪੋਤਿ[/FONT]ਆਪਨ[/FONT]ਸੰਗਿ[/FONT]ਰਾਚੁ[/FONT][/FONT]॥[/FONT]
Oṯ poṯ āpan sang rācẖ.[/FONT]
Through and through, He is blended with His creation.[/FONT]
ਤਾ[/FONT]ਕੀ[/FONT]ਗਤਿ[/FONT]ਮਿਤਿ[/FONT]ਕਹੀ[/FONT]ਨ[/FONT]ਜਾਇ[/FONT][/FONT]॥[/FONT]
Ŧā kī gaṯ miṯ kahī na jā▫e.[/FONT]
His state and extent cannot be described.[/FONT]
ਦੂਸਰ[/FONT]ਹੋਇ[/FONT]ਤ[/FONT]ਸੋਝੀ[/FONT]ਪਾਇ[/FONT][/FONT]॥[/FONT]
Ḏūsar ho▫e ṯa sojẖī pā▫e.[/FONT]
If there were another like Him, then only he could understand Him.[/FONT]





Creationism, is more deterministically set... in the sense that something handcrafted or created life...

Evolution and natural selection leaves more up to chance. Now the theory of evolution doesn't necessarily explain how life first began, which is why there is room for creationism or science and religion to meet.

But evolution is based on pressures external on an organisms, thus in within a certain population with a given amount of genetic diversity (not enough genetic diversity can actually be detrimental to evolution, as there is less resistance to certain external factors like disease) certain traits will be desirable and will allow for certain organisms within that population to thrive. Those animals which have the correct genetic make up, or traits will have the change to reproduce and form more offspring with that specific trait.... through generations this trait becomes favorable.... and this continues on to the point where new species are formed all together...

Now evolution is slow process and there are many other factors involved.



4. Is evolution a theory or a fact?
Theory, because there is no way to fully prove evolution at this point. We can artificially select specific traits, but we cannot naturally see them occurring

5. We all evolve from the day we are born in the way of talking, crawling, walking, understanding, learning, unlearning, relearning. These are the facts. What is your opinion about this?
Not so much facts but developmental milestones given the correct conditions.... Lot of this has to do with our environment...

Babies who are malnourished will not have the muscle tone to learn how to walk. By about 1 year, babies have to be strong enough to actually be able to do this. Same thing with talking, talking is learned. There are many studies that show if we are not stimulated at an early age we will not learn how to talk. Babies will make babbling noises which we select and enforce through conditioning for them to learn language and for their brains to develop. This will not occur if they are not exposed before the age 1. These are not give-ins, external environment plays a huge role.

Understanding/learning/relearning etc. are all traits that we have to train to achieve. Understanding anything, from reading a book or how to put something together takes studying... so again it comes to us externally or internally cultivating these habits. Yes we 'evolve' as we grow, but only as much as we are pushed to. Placed in different environments we as humans are very adaptable and can learn almost anything.... however same is true with out that external stimulus we don't necessarily have to evolve in any way.

6. Where does Sikhi stand on Creationism, evolution and intelligent design?
I think I partly answered that above, there is no set 'creation' plan. But rather the idea that the creator or the universal being has always been present (Japji Sahib):

ਆਦਿ[/FONT]ਸਚੁ[/FONT]ਜੁਗਾਦਿ[/FONT]ਸਚੁ[/FONT][/FONT]॥[/FONT]
Āḏ sacẖ jugāḏ sacẖ.[/FONT]
True In The Primal Beginning. True Throughout The Ages.[/FONT]
ਹੈ[/FONT]ਭੀ[/FONT]ਸਚੁ[/FONT]ਨਾਨਕ[/FONT]ਹੋਸੀ[/FONT]ਭੀ[/FONT]ਸਚੁ[/FONT][/FONT]॥[/FONT]੧॥[/FONT]
Hai bẖī sacẖ Nānak hosī bẖī sacẖ. ||1||[/FONT]
True Here And Now. O Nanak, Forever And Ever True. ||1||[/FONT]

I will probably need to get back to this question after thinking an reading a bit more on it.

7. What is your personal opinion about #6? Please elaborate.

8. Is the insistence on Creationism/Intelligent design the boom or doom of all religions?

9. Or can God and Evolution co-exist in harmony even if they contradict each other?
I think it depends on how you choose to interpret both... Religion has room for evolution, i'm not sure if Evolution has room for religion. In the sense, that how evolution works can very much be apart of intelligent design and I choose to believe that it very much is. Its not a coincidence with the amount of diversity of life that we see on this planet, its hard to believe that only by chance did all of the organisms really come to be. Thus the idea of evolution and natural selection, can fit into intelligent design.
 

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
Jun 30, 2004
5,029
7,158
Henderson, NV.
Angrisha ji,

Guru Fateh.

Thanks for your input. I like it. It gives us room to learn a lot from this conversation. I will express my thoughts tomorrow.

Regards

Tejwant Singh
 

Harkiran Kaur

Leader

Writer
SPNer
Jul 21, 2012
1,393
1,909
Angrisha Ji,

Further to your post above, reference evolution and natural selection...

If natural selection / evolution was the pnly process by which the planet arrived at what we have today for species, then something doesn't make sene to me. There are other species which have been around FAR longer than humans, or even primates that could have evolved into humans... You would think those species (crocodillians are one example) would have evolved before anything that became what we understand human to be today??

Why out of MILLIONS of species, are humans the ONLY species to have developed to the point of thinking and creativity we currently possess? Surely if everything was based purely on natural secletion and evolution, crocodiles should have evolved and been walking around and talking long before us!?

...or ANY other species for that matter... why are we the ONLY species with creative potential?????

In fact humans are one of the youngest species on the planet, relatively speaking! If our brains have developed THAT much in THAT short of time... yet not one single other species has out of millions... something doesn't add up for me.

I agree that 'intelligent design' to me means creation was guided by an 'intelligence' meaning it was created purposefully... Why does there have to be an opposite (aka dumb design)?? The very word 'design' implies a 'designer'! The word 'creation' implies a 'creator'! In fact we could even take the word intelligence out of it... the fact that the Universe was 'created' or 'designed' implies an intelligence that did the designing or creating.
 

angrisha

SPNer
Jun 24, 2010
95
231
33
Canada
Akasha JI

I oversimplified natural selection in my post above, it is a process that has been occurring since the earth was created (maybe even longer). The crocodiles like you have used as an example are also a species of evolution.... it is also been documented that the human lineage diverged from primates millions of years ago...

Natural selection (aka survival of the fittest) and thus evolution relies on genetics more so than anything. If there are two individuals in a species one with trait A and one with trait B, in normal environmental circumstances these two have been existing co-currently for hundreds of years... but lets say one year the environment changes and suddenly the individuals with an population with trait B are better able to survive that change, then those individuals will be able to further reproduce and pass that desired trait along...

This started from the very first set of organisms which appeared on this plant, and through millions and billions of years through selection and evolution of species we came to be.

Why are we the only species? We're really not, interns of brain size and mass we have evolved the brain capacity to be able to 'think for ourselves', but their are many other species like dolphins, great apes, even crows which are very intelligent. We, dominate because we can use tools to mainipulate our enviorment, thus our greatest evolutionary advantage is our brain... phyiscally and probably every other physical aspect we are very weak. Even our brains are capable of constant change, it has been shown we can enforce new neural pathways just by how we choose to think... it is also documented that subsequent generations are getting more intelligent than the ones that passed.

Now for me where God comes into all this, is that idea of 'chance'... that chance event which influences the course of evolution... its dont really believe in coincidences.
 

Harkiran Kaur

Leader

Writer
SPNer
Jul 21, 2012
1,393
1,909
What I was trying to get across was that we really are the only species who has been able to dominate in this way... develop technology, etc. If there was even ONE other species who did this, I'd drop my point... but it just seems very unrealistic that only one species out of millions and millions was able to do this... I mean, we have landed on the moon! We have peered into the depths of the subatomic, and to the outer reaches of the Universe (Hubble Deep Field). Not a single other species on the planet has developed their brain to this capacity. Dolphins, Elephants etc even though intelligent, are still not even anywhere near this level. Again, even if ONE other species had delved into science, or sent a member of their species to the moon, or the depths of the oceans in a submarine, or created symphonies, or poetry, or art... etc.... but there isn't. We are the only species out of millions and millions... agreeing with your stancs on coincidence, I just can't see how that is coincidence.

In short I agree with you... evolution is a known process... but it is being guided.
 
Jan 26, 2012
127
132
In addition, there' a theory that I read lately about multiple bangs, not just one.. which would mean that our 'big bang' might have been apart of a series of other bangs.... so the idea of multiple 'universes' arises.
I have to ask about this, sounds fascinating.

In this theory are they saying that more than one big bang occurred in this universe? Or that there are physically separate big bangs outside of this expanding universe?
 

Luckysingh

Writer
SPNer
Dec 4, 2011
1,633
2,748
Vancouver
How about the reincarnation overlapping with evolution ?

What I mean is if we evolved from primates into the 'AWARE' and intelligent species, doesn't this mean that a certain entity within the primates continued to reincarnate as time went on ?
This is what I think reincarnation means more than your passed away granddad coming back as little great grandson !
It seems a little complicated and I have only just, this very minute thought of it, so I don't know if anything similar is documented anywhere else !

In terms of this entity of consciousness or the god within or whatever you want to call it, I think that it is present in every living species !
YES.... the tree, plants, insects...etc.. all have this consciousness within BUT,the big BUT is the difference between them and us humans. You see we are AWARE of ourselves and our being just like they are BUT the EXTRA bonus we have acquired is this AWARENESS of being AWARE.
In effect, we are AWARE of our own AWARENESS.

:interestedmunda:In science we are now realizing the benefits of being aware of your consciousness.
The very spiritual or gifted can be aware of the powers of consciousness in the sense that they can develop or have a sixth sense or be telepathic..etc..
These qualities can be explored and encountered by tapping into your self and finding that timeless entity within. This can be achieved through methods of self development and funny enough, meditation is normally one of the 1st avenues explored !
This is no joke about what I'm talking about and I believe that US intelligence is currently investing tons of dollars to achieve communication between soldiers and army personnel via NON-radio/transmitter/digital/technologic ie. via telepathic means..(Interesting!!):interestedmunda: . I believe they are very interested in how we can learn about ourselves and be able to use these unknown and hidden energies to succeed in the fight to have power over the world !
 

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
Jun 30, 2004
5,029
7,158
Henderson, NV.
angrisha ji,

Guru Fateh.

You write:

Tejwant Singh Ji

This topic to me is an very interesting one, being a part of the scientific community it is one that at some point in the past I have had to deal with. So Im going to attempt to give my take on your question.
As the old saying goes, curiosity killed the cat but sharpened one’s mind.

I believe greatly in intelligent design, beyond simple evolution.
I think before we can delve deeper into it, one has to define what “intelligent design” means here. Is it subjective or objective? If it is the former then it depends on the subject to define it. If it is the latter, then it is the same for all.

The truth is there is so much about the universe that we don't know. It is estimated that we only really understand 4% of the known universe (I also always found it interesting that's really how much we understand about the human mind).
I agree with you. Declaring that, ”We don’t know” is the most courageous thing to do.

But, when you take a look at just the world around us and how perfectly everything seems to fit together its hard to believe that through natural selection alone we would have gotten this far. There are organisms which fit every known (and unknown) niche. So, I think the process of evolution fits into intelligent design... the starting point of Earth as we know it, its a very specific set of circumstances which allowed us to be here today. Every single organism, and living and non-living entity is essentially made up of all of the same molecules with different combinations. So to me, I think that the chances of this happening by 'chance' or evolution alone is hard to completely grasp.
Yes, I am also in awe with the wow factors that surround us but again, I am proud to say, I do not know how this all happened. Perhaps, one day we will have the glimpse of it.

The work in string theory and some other ones these days are challenging what we know about the universe.
Not everyone agrees with the string theory whereas almost all agree with the evolution theory.

In addition, there' a theory that I read lately about multiple bangs, not just one.. which would mean that our 'big bang' might have been apart of a series of other bangs.... so the idea of multiple 'universes' arises. The point being, we dont really ever know anything for certain (scientifically)
Regarding this other theory of multiple bangs you have read, it sounds celestially salacious and I will leave it to that.

(Im really not sure if that answered any question you asked, im going to have to think on this more?)
Well, that is the only way. A Sikh never ceases to learn.

My question:
2. If there is intelligent design, does that imply there is also dumb design? What is it?

Your response:
Im not sure why one must imply the other? I think, for me intelligent design or universal intelligence is something beyond my own understanding. Thus it is more intelligent that my mind is capable of understanding, with its limitations (Kant says we are incapable of understanding the universe because we are incapable of moving past our own perspectives)... so if there is must be a dumb design, it must be one that we humans have decided to make ourselves?
If it is one’s beyond understanding, then it can be called either. I wish Kant had read Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji because it became our Guru after his birth. If he had studied it, he would have gotten the tools about broadening one’s perspectives beyond one’s own imagination. Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji gives us those tools. Guru Nanak said that in Jap without the help of any telescope.

It depends how you choose to look at Creationism.. now forgive me if I'm wrong in any of the following....

Creationism, being born and raised in the west has always sorta been associated in my mind with the biblical explanation of the world being created in 7 days. Where, "God" literally created everything that we see. This idea ive always had a problem with for many reasons, which can essentially be its own thread so I will not get into it here....

If we go beyond that idea, there is another idea of abundance that comes forth. My understanding of this is that, the universe or or 'God' is so vast and so plentiful, life couldn't help but be created through him.

Most eastern traditions, including our own do not give such detailed explanation of creation.
Creationism for me is like “Intelligent Design” which is also used in the Christiandom. My question is the same. Is the meaning subjective or objective? Once we decide that, then our response and understanding of it will change accordingly.

And, who is HIM in the above?

Here are couple quick examples (Page 937) SSGS:
ਜੰਤਉਪਾਇਵਿਚਿਪਾਇਅਨੁਕਰਤਾਅਲਗੁਅਪਾਰੁ॥੪੯॥
Janṯ upā▫e vicẖ pā▫i▫an karṯā alag apār. ||49||
Forming His creatures, He placed Himself within them; the Creator is unattached and infinite. ||49|

ਸ੍ਰਿਸਟੇਭੇਉਨਜਾਣੈਕੋਇ॥
Sariste bẖe▫o na jāṇai ko▫e.
No one knows the mystery of the Creator of the World

And page 297
ਆਪਿਸਾਚੁਧਾਰੀਸਭਸਾਚੁ॥
Āp sācẖ ḏẖārī sabẖ sācẖ.
He Himself is True, and all that He has established is True.
ਓਤਿਪੋਤਿਆਪਨਸੰਗਿਰਾਚੁ॥
Oṯ poṯ āpan sang rācẖ.
Through and through, He is blended with His creation.
ਤਾਕੀਗਤਿਮਿਤਿਕਹੀਨਜਾਇ॥
Ŧā kī gaṯ miṯ kahī na jā▫e.
His state and extent cannot be described.
ਦੂਸਰਹੋਇਤਸੋਝੀਪਾਇ॥
Ḏūsar ho▫e ṯa sojẖī pā▫e.
If there were another like Him, then only he could understand Him.
This is the problem I find quoting one liners from Gurbani. It does not create any understanding of the wonderful message of our Gurus rather to the contrary. Secondly most of the literal translations are misleading.

Lastly, what are we trying to prove here?

Are we trying to share the message from the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji or are we using it in our argument to prove some point of ours?

If it is the former, then the whole Shabad with one's own understanding should be posted so all can understand the message of the said Shabad, which as a result becomes the tool to better the understanding of the self and the surroundings.

If it is the latter, then sadly, we are using Gurbani as a weapon rather than a tool in my opinion.

Creationism, is more deterministically set... in the sense that something handcrafted or created life...
Again, depends on how we define it as mentioned before.

Evolution and natural selection leaves more up to chance. Now the theory of evolution doesn't necessarily explain how life first began, which is why there is room for creationism or science and religion to meet.
I am again proud to say that I haven't the faintest notion.

But evolution is based on pressures external on an organisms, thus in within a certain population with a given amount of genetic diversity (not enough genetic diversity can actually be detrimental to evolution, as there is less resistance to certain external factors like disease) certain traits will be desirable and will allow for certain organisms within that population to thrive. Those animals which have the correct genetic make up, or traits will have the change to reproduce and form more offspring with that specific trait.... through generations this trait becomes favorable.... and this continues on to the point where new species are formed all together...

Now evolution is slow process and there are many other factors involved.
Yes, we are always in the discovering mode, which means we can only have the glimpse of the tip of the iceberg, what more there is, is a fascination to hold on its own.

Theory, because there is no way to fully prove evolution at this point. We can artificially select specific traits, but we cannot naturally see them occurring.
I agree, but a well accepted one.

My question:
5. We all evolve from the day we are born in the way of talking, crawling, walking, understanding, learning, unlearning, relearning. These are the facts. What is your opinion about this?

Your response:

Not so much facts but developmental milestones given the correct conditions.... Lot of this has to do with our environment...

Babies who are malnourished will not have the muscle tone to learn how to walk. By about 1 year, babies have to be strong enough to actually be able to do this. Same thing with talking, talking is learned. There are many studies that show if we are not stimulated at an early age we will not learn how to talk. Babies will make babbling noises which we select and enforce through conditioning for them to learn language and for their brains to develop. This will not occur if they are not exposed before the age 1. These are not give-ins, external environment plays a huge role.

Understanding/learning/relearning etc. are all traits that we have to train to achieve. Understanding anything, from reading a book or how to put something together takes studying... so again it comes to us externally or internally cultivating these habits. Yes we 'evolve' as we grow, but only as much as we are pushed to. Placed in different environments we as humans are very adaptable and can learn almost anything.... however same is true with out that external stimulus we don't necessarily have to evolve in any way.
We are mixing apples and oranges here I am afraid. Yes, nurturing does affect in the evolutionary process of the individual but it is evolution nonetheless.

I think I partly answered that above, there is no set 'creation' plan. But rather the idea that the creator or the universal being has always been present (Japji Sahib):

ਆਦਿਸਚੁਜੁਗਾਦਿਸਚੁ॥
Āḏ sacẖ jugāḏ sacẖ.
True In The Primal Beginning. True Throughout The Ages.
ਹੈਭੀਸਚੁਨਾਨਕਹੋਸੀਭੀਸਚੁ॥੧॥
Hai bẖī sacẖ Nānak hosī bẖī sacẖ. ||1||
True Here And Now. O Nanak, Forever And Ever True. ||1||
Again, the above in its literal translation indicates the Absolute Truth as it is used in the Abrahamic religions, whereas in Sikhi, Truth Is Absolute.

Case in point, the Earth was all together once, now we have different continents and many other changes that have taken place on this Earth and beyond. In Sikhi, truth is as fluid as the rushing river waters. That is what the first Pauri of Jap indicates.

I am sure yourself with the scientific mind understand and appreciate that.

I think it depends on how you choose to interpret both... Religion has room for evolution, i'm not sure if Evolution has room for religion. In the sense, that how evolution works can very much be apart of intelligent design and I choose to believe that it very much is. Its not a coincidence with the amount of diversity of life that we see on this planet, its hard to believe that only by chance did all of the organisms really come to be. Thus the idea of evolution and natural selection, can fit into intelligent design
.

Once again, we should define the terms first.

Thanks for the lively interaction. I hope we continue in this manner.

Regards

Tejwant Singh
 
Last edited:

angrisha

SPNer
Jun 24, 2010
95
231
33
Canada
Akasha Ji

I think thats the the point, that there can really only be one species favored. The chances or probability of this even happening with one species is around 10-40 or even worse (Ill have to research to find exact numbers), if you throw 2 species with equal abilities into the mix it gets even less than that. So, statistically speaking, it is not that hard believe that we are the only ones. It can be demonstrated over and over again with only one species dominating in a given set of conditions.

Luckysingh Ji

You wrote:

YES.... the tree, plants, insects...etc.. all have this consciousness within BUT,the big BUT is the difference between them and us humans. You see we are AWARE of ourselves and our being just like they are BUT the EXTRA bonus we have acquired is this AWARENESS of being AWARE.
In effect, we are AWARE of our own AWARENESS.
Awareness is a really big topic.... but I will make a few comments...

This concept of being aware of our own awareness can be seen as a gift, or also somewhat as a down fall to us humans (it allows for our ego to exist too). I remember one time when I was a bit younger saying to my dad, I am jealous of the trees because they are always connected with the universe. With out having a mind or an ego to get in the way they can remain in total presence in the current moment all of the time.... He simply said to me, how do you know that is the case?.... For me, later I understood that we humans have a tendency to project our own perspectives onto things. We can never be sure that an insect is unaware or its own awareness...


Dalsingh Ji

Theory is that we are apart of a chain reaction of bangs.... you can do a quick google search for the current trends from this theory (its been around for a while) but heres a couple to get you started

http://www.kieferco.com/kieferco\mbt\mbt.html

http://discovermagazine.com/2004/feb/expert-forum-lemonick0210#.UfsaqG1GaVo



Tejwant Singh ji

Ill answer a few of the questions you have posted... Most of these will require contemplation...

Intelligent design, IMO is subjective to us.... because the design simply is... therefore it wouldn't know itself to be intelligent this is something that we give it as we observe it.... I think it also ties into the idea, we see what we want to see?

"HIM" typically refers to the idea of the creator, Christianity typically seems to refer to the creator as an HIM

The use of Shabad for my purpose was to relate to your question of creationism and sikhi. It wasn't really to prove a point but to rather point out the differences in western and eastern tradition when it comes to describing creation in general.

The idea of the earth being separated now, I think ties into the thinking that you stated being subjective or objective. Outside looking in, the Earth is still united it is still a planet suspended in space... from our perspective we choose to view things as separated.


Sorry for the long reply...
 

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
Jun 30, 2004
5,029
7,158
Henderson, NV.
angrisha ji,

Guru Fateh.

I will wait for your whole response but I would like to point out one thing you said which is in bold:

Tejwant Singh ji

Ill answer a few of the questions you have posted... Most of these will require contemplation...

Intelligent design, IMO is subjective to us.... because the design simply is... therefore it wouldn't know itself to be intelligent this is something that we give it as we observe it.... I think it also ties into the idea, we see what we want to see?

"HIM" typically refers to the idea of the creator, Christianity typically seems to refer to the creator as an HIM

The use of Shabad for my purpose was to relate to your question of creationism and sikhi. It wasn't really to prove a point but to rather point out the differences in western and eastern tradition when it comes to describing creation in general.

The idea of the earth being separated now, I think ties into the thinking that you stated being subjective or objective. Outside looking in, the Earth is still united it is still a planet suspended in space... from our perspective we choose to view things as separated.
You with your scientific mind know better what I meant or are we getting into semantics for the sake of the argument or just being argumentative?

Of course, you know and anyone else who reads it does too what I meant by the Earth separated into continents. It does not mean it got fragmented and dissipated into the universe's ether.

You are better than that and you know very well what I meant.

Regards

Tejwant Singh
 

spnadmin

1947-2014 (Archived)
SPNer
Jun 17, 2004
14,500
19,180
Tejwant ji

Forgive me for interrupting. I took Angrisha ji's words about the earth's apparent separation as an idea apart from the earth separated into continents. Now that you draw attention to it, I can understand the misunderstanding. It never occurred to me before that. I can see how it can look like a mysterious contradiction, but it was very likely not meant that way.

Funny how the eye jumps onto one part of a paragraph and misses another part. I never realized you were connecting separation to continents etc. and now wonder why I read it wrong.
 

angrisha

SPNer
Jun 24, 2010
95
231
33
Canada
Again, the above in its literal translation indicates the Absolute Truth as it is used in the Abrahamic religions, whereas in Sikhi, Truth Is Absolute.

Case in point, the Earth was all together once, now we have different continents and many other changes that have taken place on this Earth and beyond. In Sikhi, truth is as fluid as the rushing river waters. That is what the first Pauri of Jap indicates.

I am sure yourself with the scientific mind understand and appreciate that.
Tejwant Singh Ji

SPNji is right, I wasn't trying to be argumentative, I really didn't think of it that way at all. I was simply drawing attention to the idea of preservative and how we choose to interpret certain things in life. I intention, I was actually agreeing with you on the point that truth is fluid, and that fluidity allows one to view the Earth metaphor as you described..from the level of which we know of continental drift and change (scientifically based).... into more abstract notion that everything not matter how we see it, is always apart of a greater whole.

Which is essentially still idea of your thread.. how does evolution fit.

Im really sorry if this caused confusion, and I know im a bit new to these boards and im quickly learning I need to explain my thoughts a bit more thoroughly. I do apologize.
 

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
Jun 30, 2004
5,029
7,158
Henderson, NV.
Tejwant Singh Ji

SPNji is right, I wasn't trying to be argumentative, I really didn't think of it that way at all. I was simply drawing attention to the idea of preservative and how we choose to interpret certain things in life. I intention, I was actually agreeing with you on the point that truth is fluid, and that fluidity allows one to view the Earth metaphor as you described..from the level of which we know of continental drift and change (scientifically based).... into more abstract notion that everything not matter how we see it, is always apart of a greater whole.

Which is essentially still idea of your thread.. how does evolution fit.

Im really sorry if this caused confusion, and I know im a bit new to these boards and im quickly learning I need to explain my thoughts a bit more thoroughly. I do apologize.
angrisha ji,

Guru Fateh.

Had I said Earth's mass, then this confusion would not have come up. I do apologise for not making myself clearer.

On that note, let's carry on:)

Regards

Tejwant Singh

PS: I must add that you are an added asset to this forum with your thought process. I always appreciate your well thought postings on different subjects, Shabad of the week for example. You and I are on the same wavelength on that too. Sikhi is pragmatic, and if we do not transport our learnings in our everyday practical lives, no matter from where we have learnt those, then we have not learned a thing but inflated more the me-ism side of ours. Rather than sprouting out of the muck like a lotus we start wallowing in it.
 
Last edited:

jaginder

SPNer
Jan 26, 2011
35
77
I have to ask about this, sounds fascinating.

In this theory are they saying that more than one big bang occurred in this universe? Or that there are physically separate big bangs outside of this expanding universe?
Dalsingh Ji,
If you would permit me to share my limited knowledge on this.
This theory is now more known as Multi-verse theory is the believe that there could have been more than one big bangs.
Its quite simple really, if you can imagine size of things in this order (from small to large) :
Let you mind imagine our solar system then, expand your imagination to our galaxy which we fondly call the milky way, then lets travel beyond our galaxy. we would pass other galaxies and celestial objects or amazing stuff which makes up our universe that scientists believe was a result of a big bang.

The Multi-verse theory tells of other universe out there beyond ours.

As a layman, I don't know what took them so long to figure this out. Its highly probable. If there was a big bang 'here' why wouldn't it be possible to be a big bang 'there' too?

I do not let myself confuse the term universe with space. If you can imagine ponds in a vast desert. The universe are like those ponds and the desert is space. The size of the universe, though unfathomable in our mind, is finite. Space is infinite and goes on and on. That is why its so amazing to some but scary to others.

Also, do not confuse this with the multi-dimension theory though it uses the multi-verse theory as its basis. That's a story for another day.

I hope my post made sense with my limited knowledge and bad English.


Best,
Jinder
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Featured Shabad

This shabad is on Ang 201. It is one that is frequently taught early on in kirtan classes to children but the meaning never explained but is quite a simple shabad. As previously, literal English...

SPN on Facebook

...
Top