Dear Friends, what are your views on this issue ?

Question

Two Friends, Peter and Sean are conversating among themselves
Peter: “ Hey Sean ! can I ask you something ?”
Sean: “ Yeh! Why not ?”
Peter: “ As far as living organisms are concerned, Mankind stands at the apex of the food chain and
there seems to be no natural predator of mankind excepting Cannibals.”

Sean: “ What is actually your point ?”
Peter: “ It has been medically proved that Cannibals suffer from psychiatric and genetic disorders and
that means Mankind has no predator as such looking from a broader perspective.”

Sean: “That’s true but what does that proove?”

Peter: “Sean, why do we as mankind exist on this planet?....I mean, being at the apex of the food
Chain there has to be some role of mankind form the in the context of Universe as a whole.”

Sean: “ Peter, can you please elaborate ?”

Peter: “ Did you ever have this secret desire of talking to nature to know its final goal in relation to
Whatever is happening in the Universe ?”

Sean: “ Well! That sounds interesting. Go on”
Peter: “ If we are enlightened about the real goal of this Universe, we can then identify our wasteful
Behaviour and would concentrate on what keeps us practically more close to that Grand Goal
the Universe. Don’t you think ?”

At this, Fred who just happened to overhear the conversation while passing by, says
“ The ultimate Goal of this Universe is meeting Almighty and though you are an atheist, you have expressed this subconscious desire of yours of knowing the wisdom behind the
happenings in the Universe. My Friend, you are Instinctively searching for your creator and
want to talk to him.”


Does every person pass through this kind of thinking process as Peter ? Did Fred’s words answer Peter’s question ?

Answer 1

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker

This is the best question you've asked yet.

Asker's Rating:

Asker's Comment:

Thanks.

Answer 2

very true
but with a little more effort
at thinking
one soon leaves 'that' impression
far behind.

what a speck of dust
is in relation to the size of the earth
the earth does not qualify even to be that
when compared to the rest of 'existence'
and on this 'nano-speck' (earth)
exists a human being
claiming to be the 'know all'

Answer 3

IDK if EVERY person passes thru the process Peter passed thru and I am not sure Fred really answered Peter's question...

But I agree with Fred... I want answers, and Christianity is the path I have chosen to get those answers.

Answer 4

Not exactly Socratic dialogue, is it? Sean is no more than a cipher, and Fred expresses opinions without justification or backup.

And Peter makes a number of assumptions that are shaky. Why is man at the apex of the food chain? At this stage in human history, we can kill anything that wants to eat us - but we can still be eaten by any number of other animals, and we stand little chance when unarmed against a host of true apex predators like lions, sharks and even snakes.

Our flesh is constantly parasitised by small organisms, bloodsuckers, platyhelminthes, viruses and bacteria. Many humans die from such damage. Some we still have no defence against.

At least one writer has opined that the true dominant species on the planet is grass. In sheer mass terms, we are outweighed by thousands of other species, in particular bacteria.

We do, on the other hand, have the most inflated opinion of our importance. No other species can beat us there. Some of us even think the universe was built for our benefit.

Answer 5

Wait, mankind is at the top of the food chain?

Humans are conveniently soft, hairless, abundant, and presumably quite tasty. We DO have natural predators but thanks to years of following Fred's imaginary friend (dominion over all the creatures of the Earth), we've managed to nearly destroy them all.

Your entire story is based on the assumption that humans are the pinnacle of life on Earth Mankind is neither invincible nor at the top of the food chain. To believe otherwise is arrogant and narcissistic in the extreme.

Answer 6

No i think Fred is nosey and needs to mind his own business more and not butt into conversations while hes passing by.

Answer 7

Not exactly. Douglas Adams' version makes more sense to me:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kK1YgR7J…

But you're right that the idea that there are or should be god(s) is a very natural thought for humans. Many of us think they exist despite there being no evidence for it... because it's just such an appealing idea.

Answer 8

We have lots of natural predators. A human without a gun in the jungle is a walking meat stick.

Sperm whales have no natural predators either. We are not really their predators - technology enabled us to kill them if we wish to, but humans only hunt smaller whale types.

We are where we are because someone had to be. There HAD to be a species that was "at the top." If we didn't exist, it would be some other species, probably with high intelligence (dolphins, most likely, who also have no natural predators).

And what about disease? Bacteria and viruses are living things. And every now and then, one of them comes through and decimates our population. We are affected by a larger variety of diseases than any other species on earth.

None of this is proof of some magical sky daddy. It's simply a process of elimination.

Answer 9

The fact that we are tertiary consumers really means little.

Source(s):

Curiosity is a built-in evolutionary trait, and is there not because some deity wants us to know him, but because it is beneficial to our species, as can be seen by the invention of science and technology, rapidly boosting our population from a few million to nearly 7 billion.

Not to mention that most other species also have it as a trait... if curiosity is meant to be used as a means to bring us to said deity, then why did he give it, to, for example, cats, or other beings with no soul and as such no way to reach him/her/it?

Answer 10

He's searching for the creator

Answer 11

Peter and Sean are lesbians.

Answer 12

That was way too long to read. Can you shorten that?