Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
Everyone sees God always but never recognizes him.
Maybe geese recognize Him, being neither atheists nor gross materialists.
And whether or not they recognize Him, I bet they see Him.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Using maybe means you are guessing and stabbing into the dark as usual.
Geese are gross materialists .......
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
you are guessing and stabbing into the dark as usual.
Familiar territory from wrestling with, "There must be something it is like to be a bat."
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
Jim: Please tell me how one lives a non vulgar life without any form of work to support it.
Nothing needs supporting you, Jim. Not in my view. Not in my experience. I can’t explain this. How can a dirtbag climber flourish? How do starving artists get by? What happens to the homeless? It’s life. One find it everywhere.
I think you have some standards that you’re not questioning, and I wonder if you’ve ever lived on the edge for long. Things take care of themselves. You can see the wisdom of wu-wei, the action of non-action, if you let yourself see it. I know this sounds ridiculous.
Duck: Sorry but the data shows ......
It’s the data you pay attention to. Don’t choose.
HFCS,
Hell, yeah, I like the thoughtfulness of the Ghost in the Shell. Long live manga.
MH2: An incorrect attribution, Mike.
Again. Try not being so cryptic sometime, my friend. Do you have something to say? And you, too, Marlow.
Can we not possibly understand the depths of your thoughts? Do you have some to share?
Ward: I don't believe that any serious observer, in science or outside it, would conclude that human culture, in all its vast array, is "nothing more" than mere evidence of evolutionary determinism.
That’s a fair and measured response. But if you look at the preponderance on any page here of how often the evolution effects card is played, you might see that it appears to be a fundament cause to all that we apparently see today (especially in what’s been claimed here—even by you.) If one were to account for the majority of variance in effects, is, in your mind, there anything that accounts for more effect to the state of human kind than evolution to you? IF so, then you’re in the same condemned camp. We are all that evolution has made us into, right?
|
|
Ward Trotter
Trad climber
|
|
|
May 10, 2017 - 05:14pm PT
|
Why the diminishment of what it is to be human as in "dung thrower?" Why not celebrate the remarkable achievements of humanity and the stunning realization that as a human being you recognize the fallible aspects of your species with a desire to mend them: a human characteristic as stunning as the exclusively human development of the scientific method.
Dung throwing is a well-established behavior of primates in general. Maybe I brought it up as a needed counterweight following all that invoked loftiness. Dung tossing has been around longer than all the high art and culture-- and perhaps represents something much closer to the unadorned truth as to the real skinny on how humans operate and who we are in simpler, more manifest terms.
As far as celebrating the remarkable achievements of humanity, I'm all game to proceed with the party. You don't mind me throwing a cautious glance over my shoulder from time to time do you?
However,I absolutely do not have the slightest desire to embark upon the grossly Sisyphian task of mending mankind's "fallible aspects". Even if I thought such a nebulous undertaking were really, truly possible. I am inherently suspicious of such cloudy endeavors-- curing mankind of its harshest ills typically produces more formidable ones-- especially when those fallibilities seem to be clearly and inextricably rooted in our deepest natures. I do however sanction putting the definite kibosh on the usual suspect dark motivations ; such as putting murderers behind bars, and opposing tyranny, and other good works.
|
|
Ward Trotter
Trad climber
|
|
|
May 10, 2017 - 05:41pm PT
|
That’s a fair and measured response. But if you look at the preponderance on any page here of how often the evolution effects card is played, you might see that it appears to be a fundament cause to all that we apparently see today (especially in what’s been claimed here—even by you.) If one were to account for the majority of variance in effects, is, in your mind, there anything that accounts for more effect to the state of human kind than evolution to you? IF so, then you’re in the same condemned camp. We are all that evolution has made us into, right?
Yes I've noticed a relatively flat degree of evolutionary determinism on this esteemed thread and elsewhere. There are separate arguments proceeding in the biological sciences in this regard-- genetics versus epigenetics, to put it in the simplest terms.
Just for the record I'm not as much of a evolutionary determinist as you seemingly suggest in the above; especially when a discussion entails broader horizons, or when ,and if ,it would be inappropriate to invoke evolutionary theory as a facile explanation or possible solution to an entire set of multifactorial problems.
The answer to your last question might just be as absurd as the question itself : in that it calls for an analysis as to the general quantity of something I cannot rightly quantify, nor would I want to. To do so would perhaps be nothing less than to invite an entire host of surly,unwieldy contradictions, to put it mildly. It would unquestionably represent getting a little bit too deep in the weeds to remain in any degree useful or productive.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
May 10, 2017 - 06:32pm PT
|
Do you have something to say? And you, too, Marlow.
Do you read?
How you interpret what we say is up to you.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
May 11, 2017 - 02:51pm PT
|
Dung throwing is a well-established behavior of primates in general. Maybe I brought it up as a needed counterweight following all that invoked loftiness. Dung tossing has been around longer than all the high art and culture-- and perhaps represents something much closer to the unadorned truth as to the real skinny on how humans operate and who we are in simpler, more manifest terms.
That natural man is a more virtuous being and as well a more accurate revelation of humanity is a product of Rousseau that ignores the reality of human achievement on this planet.
Denigrating humanity as simply dung throwers:
I'm reminded of the guy taking a flight from L.A. to New York bitching about the quality of the food and how much leg room he has and not noticing the fact he's sitting in a chair thousands of feet in the sky and going 600 miles per hour to his destination like Apollo or some other Greek God. Take a real look at what humanity is without the romantic distortion and you might be surprised. Counterweight? Really?
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
May 11, 2017 - 02:59pm PT
|
Let's see, what interesting things have I learned reading this page?
Primates are dung-throwers. That's about it. Oh, and we're products of evolution.
JL, please come back and tell us why focusing on empty awareness is important. And how to proceed.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
May 11, 2017 - 03:53pm PT
|
It is absolutely fascinating to me that as we send these messages around the world instantly we still can't really see past our "underlying sinful ways," and celebrate all the incredibly positive things human beings have done and will do. Funny, the vestiges of our sin are the inextricable product of religious convictions abandoned. The religious skeptic abandons the sacrament of wine and wafer for recycling.
Believe me a balanced view is a helpful view.
|
|
Ward Trotter
Trad climber
|
|
|
May 11, 2017 - 04:00pm PT
|
That natural man is a more virtuous being and as well a more accurate revelation of humanity is a product of Rousseau that ignores the reality of human achievement on this planet.
I have mentioned on this thread at least once what my opinion of Rousseau is -- I think he was a type of brilliant con artist. A phony. The "noble savage" stuff was utter rubbish meant exclusively for the 18th century parlor. Rosseau parlayed such nonsense into a lucrative career because he was nonetheless brilliant in many ways, as a writer, provocateur, and as a sort of philosophical Svengali, and parlor actor.
You would have been much better off associating my comments with Darwin, but then again Darwin would be a much much harder nut to crack. Even so you would still be way off the mark.
Question: what is humanity in its most fundamental state? Do you reject man as ape? And if you accept him as ape ,detail for me how in the hell he has managed to submerge his apedom so successfully that when you look at his face you see nothing more or less than Rousseau in the Romantic age?
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
May 11, 2017 - 04:15pm PT
|
Question: what is humanity in its most fundamental state? Do you reject man as an ape? And if you accept him as ape ,detail for me how in the hell he has managed to submerge his apedom so successfully that when you look at his face you see nothing more or less than Rosseau in the Romantic age?
That's really not the question. Instead: what is humanity at its most mature state? You don't have to reject evolutionary processes to realize the importance of human achievement. The Romantic issue here is simply the notion of nature as primary force or even deity (the earth as Gaia) when the struggle and achievement of humanity is exactly the manipulation of nature for its own benefit. Human potential is nothing less than unlimited and extravagant as it leaves ape-dom in the dust. I don't reject evolution, I reject the fetter of what was only a distant predicate.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
|
May 11, 2017 - 08:49pm PT
|
MH2: Do you read? How you interpret what we say is up to you.
Yes. I get zero. If that works for you, then it works for me.
Jim:
Sorry but I don’t run to URLs or videos without some summary to encourage me. I have too much to read and view as it is.
I’m sure this doesn’t reflect on you, but there is a laziness and questionable intelligence of people who cannot paraphrase what others have written or exhibited. It leads one to suspect that the individual either doesn’t have their own thoughts or that they don’t really understand what those others have said. I get this kind of thing all the time in my classes.
The first proof of learning or understanding is acute expression.
This writing and expression 'thing' is often fairly influential and sometimes visionary. One can make others see, hear, and create entire worlds through the artfulness of their articulations. (Sycorax has a few thoughts about this, I suspect.)
Ward: The "noble savage" stuff was utter rubbish . . . .
Au contraire.
What about Man (or women) would be noble in your eyes? (This I’d like to hear from you, or anyone here.)
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
May 11, 2017 - 10:34pm PT
|
Yes. I get zero. If that works for you, then it works for me.
;>)
|
|
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Where Safety trumps Leaving No Trace
|
|
|
May 12, 2017 - 03:43am PT
|
MikeL,
but there is a laziness and questionable intelligence of people who cannot paraphrase what others have written or exhibited.
Absolutely MikeL, I agree and I have alluded to this "authority" linking habit when there is no demonstration of what the poster of link got from the article. In particular I called out Ed Hartouni on mere link dropping. Apparently it takes a skill different than being a particle physicist to readily unravel literature for the masses?
|
|
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Where Safety trumps Leaving No Trace
|
|
|
May 12, 2017 - 04:16am PT
|
Jim Brenan,
as near as I can tell the narrator of the video you post never once used the word change. He does sort of show change.
The change of something to something else is a fundamental aspect of becoming.
The video speaker talks of the infinite time universe and the start form zero. Can a change from something of nothing create something? Maybe so.
Here is one take on that. All matter/energy arose from a form of vacuum fluctuations that is different than Hawking's vacuum fluctuations at black hole boundaries. Our form of matter/energy has its zero sum cancellation form of a different form of matter/energy that exists presently somewhere else in the multiverse. It would be anti-matter/anti-energy.
When and if these 2 forms of matter/energy meet again all will be canceled = annihilated = identically 0. By this scenario is there something or is this scenario always equal to nothing? Conservation: Sum of all forms of matter/ energy of multiverse = zero.
Are there any other explanations [stories] of how something arose from nothing?
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
May 12, 2017 - 07:02am PT
|
If that works for you, then it works for me.
Mind as mechanism? How dreary.
;>)
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 12, 2017 - 07:09am PT
|
how something arose from nothing
There's no such thing ever nor will there ever be.
This is the stoopid mental speculator guessing because they are clueless.
There is always a source and it always has individuality and personality, not nothing.
In this modern age, the clueless mental speculators masquerade themselves as so called authority to the clueless public claiming life ultimately arose out of nothing .......
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
|
May 12, 2017 - 07:24am PT
|
Ward,
I’ll try.
If one thinks that nobility equates to that which is virtuous, good, worthy, moral, righteous, upright, and such, then perhaps the primitive savage exemplifies it. Modern / contemporary / civilized Man as we see him / her today has more than a few hang-ups that brings all these issues into ambiguous relief.
On the other hand, the so-called primitive, tribal savage exhibits “being” prior to most of those concerns. It seems questionable that primitive men and women suffered under too much analytical thinking, rationality, reason, or moral consideration. Why not? Were they not intelligent, did they not care, were they simply animals without soul or mind?
I would suspect that someone will point out that living moment-to-moment, hiding from predators and hunting others, following their survival instincts without question left them no energy for contemporary intellectual and ethical pursuits. Yet, . . . their art was wonderful—perhaps indicating that they indeed had soul, spirit, and were integrated in their universe.
The primitive savage not noble? From my view, I’d say as much as anyone anywhere.
In an odd sort of way, so are we noble living in the depths of our moral and intellectual ambiguities. We have “adapted” to that which we find ourselves in. We are that which we find ourselves. Although Werner might say that we are lost and defective, we might see that we have risen to equal the universe as it is. The universe is not certain, unambiguous, finite, measurable, or even describable. We may be indeed noble in that regard, for neither are we certain, unambiguous, finite, measurable, or describable. We may be peerless; we have always been peerless. The universe and we are unfolding. It’s not a coincidence.
Be well—all of you.
(Some of you people are up *really* early on this thread.)
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 12, 2017 - 07:31am PT
|
We may be peerless; we have always been peerless.
You haven't defined "we".
Earthlings are not peerless ever .......
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!