• HeathenPope@lemmy.world
    24·
    2 years ago

    Depends on which philosophy you ascribe to I suppose. While standard Judeo-Christian philosophy would most likely dismiss the notion of divine orangutans, I for one would posit that orangutans by thier very nature are divine and that humans may in fact be the only creatures on the planet that must struggle toward divinity.

    • DharmaCurious@lemmy.world
      9·
      2 years ago

      Edit: my network is being just, like, absolute crap. I don’t know why it posted multiple times. Such is the life of rural America, living with a 4g hotspot for home internet. Lol. Apologies!

      I’m a sort of hodge podge of different traditions, philosophies and religions, and this is absolutely my view. In Hinduism, one of the reasons humans are at the “top” of the reincarnation cycle is because we have the intellect to understand things like karma, and are able to achieve liberation through that understanding. In my view, while we may be the only ones able to achieve liberation, we are also the only ones building up negative karma. It’s a double edged sword. Animals, plants, bacteria, they don’t do wrong things, they don’t engage in wrong thinking. They act on impulse, on intuition, on instinct, and as such, they’re pure spirited. Humans on the other hand are capable of evil, and as such we are the only species on earth that must struggle towards divinity. We just also happen to be the only species that can understand the nature of divinity. You don’t think the universe be like it is but it do, y’know?

  • peanut_boy@lemmy.world
    4·
    2 years ago

    I would say that a species intelligent enough to believe in God could be divine. So I don’t think orangutans or gorillas would be, but we have archaeologic evidence that Neanderthals had some form of religion, so they may also have souls.

  • mawkishdave@lemmy.worldEnglish
    4·
    2 years ago

    I mean one of the greatest miracles you see religion do is interpret the bible to say what they want it to say. This is why you get one branch saying the LGBTQ+ community is horrible and another branch welcomes them with open arms. The same can be said about any social debate.

      • JesterRaiin@lemmy.world
        1·
        2 years ago

        If you’re ok with being put alongside your family in the same row as some feces throwing hairy animals, because some guys - that might as well change their opinion tomorrow - told you it’s ok, I’m not going to stop you.

        Me? I don’t feel much kinship with gorillas, thank you very much.

        • Contramuffin@lemmy.world
          11·
          2 years ago

          This guy literally just said that he doesn’t believe in evolution because he doesn’t feel like it.

          I gotta hand it to you, you managed to give the worst anti-evolution argument I’ve heard yet

          • JesterRaiin@lemmy.world
            2·
            2 years ago

            This guy literally just said that he doesn’t believe in evolution because he doesn’t feel like it.

            Actually, I have no problem with evolution. It’s just that I don’t believe in the forced division of species, one that puts us in the same cage as gorillas.

            …but, since you have obvious sexual feelings towards these funny creatures, godspeed, and may you bring beautiful children to this world.

              • JesterRaiin@lemmy.world
                2·
                2 years ago

                I can copy & paste the comment once again, this time separating each line for your convenience, if that helps.

                Just ask, I’m always glad to help those less fortunate…

            • Kerfuffle@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              4·
              2 years ago

              It’s just that I don’t believe in the forced division of species,

              What does that even mean? “Species” isn’t an actual thing that exists, it’s a way of classifying creatures that we find useful.

              one that puts us in the same cage as gorillas.

              “In the same cage”? Presumably you can accept that you have some things in common with the gorilla: you both have a heart, both have lungs, both sneeze from time to time, both need to sleep, etc. The “cage” is a continuum.

              • JesterRaiin@lemmy.worldEnglish
                1·
                2 years ago

                I have nothing to say, and I’m gonna continue to do so, so help me God.

                Yeah, nah, you’re boring.

          • JesterRaiin@lemmy.world
            1·
            2 years ago

            Nowhere near gorillas.

            I am sure that the scientific model of evolution is vast and flexible enough, so that we don’t have to occupy the same place those creatures dwell in.

            • Yulia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              4·
              2 years ago

              Where then? I mean, you seem to be more confident in yourself than most biologists, so you sure know more than them and can prove why humans belong to a different category?

              • JesterRaiin@lemmy.world
                2·
                2 years ago

                Where then?

                If you’re willing to grant me some considerable amount of money to perform relevant research and studies, I can provide a satisfactory answer.

                If you can’t, or aren’t willing to, then you need to continue to live knowing that at least one person in this world doesn’t exactly accept the model of reality you prefer.

    • DharmaCurious@lemmy.world
      4·
      2 years ago

      How are we not great apes? I’ve taken 2 whole anthropology classes and this is the first I’m hearing of this! /s

      For real, though, would love an answer. These things interest me.

        • Contramuffin@lemmy.world
          5·
          2 years ago

          I know that you’re asking rhetorically, since you have no idea how science works. But to anyone else who’s interested, the reason is because we found a dwarf planet in the asteroid belt that was bigger than Pluto, and it became hard to justify that Pluto was a planet if the planet that we found was a dwarf planet. Either both had to be planets or both had to be dwarf planets. And we ended up making both of them dwarf planets

          • JesterRaiin@lemmy.world
            1·
            2 years ago

            I know that you’re asking rhetorically, since you have no idea how science works.

            I know how science works. It discovers, analyzes, proposes a hypothesis, that becomes a theory and then - widely accepted “truth”.

            …and then, often the same truth becomes an obsolete relic of old, once enough new findings emerge, or enough of scientists agree that new definitions, approach and formulas are required.

            I know, you don’t exactly understand it, you prefer to follow to the letter everything you’re being told, and trust what people in funny uniforms say, no matter what. The bad news is that it places you in the same spot medieval (and unfortunately current) Flat Earthers occupy. The good news is that you’re about to see many changes to current “truths” across your lifetime.

            So, enjoy the ride.

            And we ended up making both of them dwarf planets

            Imagine if the opposite camp would be more convincing/charismatic/numerous and instead of stripping off Pluto of his former status, we’d get more planets to our Solar System. Wow, what a preposterous idea!

            In reality, nothing has changed. Pluto is still what it was, and it continues to move in its own slow pace across its trajectory. It’s just that some funny people decided to settle a difficult topic by a compromise.

            Same thing with the funny people who decided to equate humans with gorillas. Their distinction is also artificial, forced and imperfect. A compromise. Nothing else.

      • JesterRaiin@lemmy.world
        1·
        2 years ago

        There’s an enormous gap between “we’re better than SOME animals”, and “we’re no part of nature”. It’s so vast, that you could throw whole flotilla of USA’s Navy inside and it wouldn’t even cover its bottom.

        And yet, you managed to cross this distance in a single mental leap. Nicely done.

  • Mediocre_Bard@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    2 years ago

    Spinoza has a good quote that I reflect on often.

    “I believe that a triangle, if it could speak, would say that God is eminently triangular, and a circle that the divine nature is eminently circular; and thus would every one ascribe his own attributes to God.”- Spinoza

    So, anything can be divine if there is something that prescribes divinity to it.

  • Dr. Coomer@lemmy.world
    1·
    2 years ago

    From what I’ve heard, the Bible doesn’t count animals as having the same spiritual level as humans. However, I disagree with this idea, and honestly believe osme animals are just as spiritual power as humans, considering some are very intelligent and just down right good.