The Philosophy of Early Human Evolution

ruggedraven36 said:Honestly? To me, they all just sound like the same word.

Yeah... just the gays themselves!

ruggedraven36 said:I'm with you on the first sentence, but the second one? Not so much. Sure, evolution is a continuous process, but calling it *only* that is a stretch. And I don't buy the idea that species aren't objectively real or that they're just something humans made up. Look, humans didn't invent elephants or giraffes. They exist.

Still, it doesn't make sense to me—at least not logically—how one species could ever emerge from another if a species is defined as a group? If it's a closed loop of animals breeding within themselves to produce more of that same group, how does the "human group" even get started?

I think Engels hit the nail on the head. Labor is what actually made us.

But then you have to ask—who created labor?

Harold Doyle3 said:Yeah... just the gays themselves!

If you want to spout nonsense, go jump in the chat—that’s where everyone goes to talk trash.

ruggedraven36 said:If you want to spout nonsense, go jump in the chat—that’s where everyone goes to talk trash.

That goes for you too.

Harold Doyle3 said:That goes for you too.

To all sounds the same to me—I don't see any real difference. One is just being uninformed, whereas you? You're just being intentionally dense.

ruggedraven36 said:To all sounds the same to me—I don't see any real difference. One is just being uninformed, whereas you? You're just being intentionally dense.

You claim to see "meaningful differences" because you've got the education, the literacy, and the intellect to back it up—but you’re just trying to drag everything into the realm of idealism. The facts are perfectly clear from an evolutionary standpoint... you just refuse to admit it, so you resort to trolling.