Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Lynne Leichtfuss
Trad climber
Will know soon
|
|
Hilarious, Marlow! I hope something interesting can be said for me as well.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
The first scientist to ever win a Nobel Prize in literature (since it wasn't Carl Sagan) should be this guy...
https://tinyurl.com/y8vkefu9
“In this golden age of enlightened science writing, it is stunning that no scientist has won the Nobel Prize for Literature. It is time literature’s highest award be granted to a scientist whose writings have changed not just science but society. No living scientist is more deserving of such recognition than Richard Dawkins, whose every book reflects his literary genius and scientific substance. Science in the Soul is the perfect embodiment of Nobel–quality literature.” - Michael Shermer
|
|
Craig Fry
Trad climber
So Cal.
|
|
^^^
Is that New?
I need to read it.
|
|
August West
Trad climber
Where the wind blows strange
|
|
If you were a quadriplegic should my tax dollars go to help support you? Base on pure science I could certainly win an argument that resources could be put to better use.
Maybe I'm unclear what you mean by "pure science" but I don't see that that follows at all.
Given our society's incredible wealth and technology, I don't see why science is opposed to spending money on health care.
A belief in Science doesn't mean that you believe that everything possible should be done to maximize the economy damn the consequences for any given individual.
Society has to make trade-offs and choices. Some of these Science might have something to offer the discussion, just how much money does it cost to support a quadriplegic at some given standard of care?. But just because Science doesn't give a definite answer doesn't make it reasonable to assume that there is some supernatural being that has told society how they should go about making choices.
You can have a philosophy that is based neither on "God" nor "Science". Secular Humanism would be an example.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
All narratives yield over time. Justice is an ancient narrative, to hold otherwise seems ludicrous. And its not that malleable either, as we see in the daily drama of the politics and courts of our time.
But here's the problem: though local inflections change whether in myth or literature the sources for those narratives, that is the psychological compulsions based on human physical experiences: birth, adolescence, arrival at adulthood, love, sex, marriage, childbirth, decline and then death, these are unchanging as part of the human condition and are manifested in a variety of mythological or literary ways that allow or become coping mechanisms. Stories may change but the compelling drive to those stories doesn't and as a result the old stories still resonate if read in an enlightened manner, including the story of Genesis in the bible which in its own way is a work of literary genius addressing how something can possibly come from nothing. To dismiss Genesis as not scientifically accurate and therefore worthless is like dismissing Hamlet because it's a fictional work, when, in fact, it is not fictional at all, but completely realistic in regard to addressing the human condition.
|
|
Contractor
Boulder climber
CA
|
|
DM- Justice is an ancient narrative, to hold otherwise seems ludicrous
The Greeks had, then lost it
The Romans had, then lost it.
Justice ascends a single helix, corkscrewing upward with shifts to the left and right and periods of transition or moderation in between. Each shift generally results in the abolishment of failed ideas and the entrenchment of successful ideas. The left and right both contribute successful and failed ideas, thus maintaining the axis or balancing point.
In a successful Society it's critical to have opposition.
A constant state of moderation would eliminate the experimentation of good ideas and the opposition to bad ideas. Social evolution would be non existent.
To have separation of church and state allows religion to be a force in the process and not a nullifier.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
|
|
curious, Paul
how then is Genesis scientifically accurate?
|
|
rbord
Boulder climber
atlanta
|
|
Marriage is a physical aspect of humans life that is unchanging as part of the human condition (like death, decline, etc.)? With US divorce rates at 40% and 30% of Americans choosing not to marry at all? Seems to me to be in kind of a different realm than say death, which, I agree, is a physical aspect of our unchanging human condition for 100% of humans.
But do we get stuck on a belief that marriage is an unchanging physical component of our unchanging human nature in the same way that our supertopian friend got stuck believing that Jesus physically filled his gas tank?
I get that humans learn to believe stuff, but what many humans are mostly interested in understanding is what is actually true.
And sure, I also get that what everyone believes is that whatever silliness they happen to believe is what is actually true. And for most people that's probably good enough.
I didn't fill my gas tank, so Jesus must have filled it!
You never married? What's wrong with you?! Why don't you obey your unchanging human nature and get married and be a human the right way? You know, like me.
And while you're at it choose the right religion for a human like us with our unchanging human nature to believe - Christianity! Our physical reality is that there's a heavenly gas station on every corner.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
" To dismiss Genesis as not scientifically accurate and therefore worthless is like dismissing Hamlet because it's a fictional work, when, in fact, it is not fictional at all, but completely realistic in regard to addressing the human condition."
Smoke and mirrors.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
how then is Genesis scientifically accurate?
I didn't say it was, in fact, that was my point.
But consider this: how does the universe come in to being for humanity if not for consciousness. For the universe to be known as an epistemological experience consciousness is requisite: what is the universe without human consciousness? It may be, but it is not known. In Genesis the author submits that the word, a direct manifestation of conscious mind, is the source of creation: "Let there be..." I think that's a brilliant realization that the "known" universe, that is, what we know or realize is, first of all, a function/creation of mind.
Smoke and mirrors.
I love the typical "science" retort to any idea not agreed with: "your wrong." Brilliant!
|
|
Craig Fry
Trad climber
So Cal.
|
|
Paul
does consciousness exist without a brain?
Can you site examples
what does this non-biological consciousness do?
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
does consciousness exist without a brain?
Can you site examples
what does this non-biological consciousness do?
I don't know. I certainly don't have any examples. However, I can say with certainty that the potential for consciousness existed before there was a brain, because it's here.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
"does consciousness exist without a brain?"
No...plain and simple.
" I can say with certainty that the potential for consciousness existed before there was a brain, because it's here."
Prove it.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
Prove it.
Really?
How could it not have been potentially available if you have it? How can you be a conscious being if consciousness wasn't a possibility in this universe. If it were impossible you wouldn't be writing on this thread.
|
|
Craig Fry
Trad climber
So Cal.
|
|
consciousness existed before there was a brain, because it's here. Here?
It seems to be restricted to biological brains, does it not?
and there is no evidence of it existing before brains
the slow evolution of the brain explains consciousness,
are you saying that it existed before and was somehow transferred to biological brains?
Why? How? When?
|
|
Contractor
Boulder climber
CA
|
|
August West, good points.
Pure science can just exist benignly and be observed, without question.
I guess I should have made more clear- pure science as it relates to application. No hope, no soul, no human emotions, just logic and algorithms similar to AI.
My broader point was that dogmatic religion is much worse in my view.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
Here?
It seems to be restricted to biological brains, does it not?
So what? Ask yourself how is it that there is such a thing as consciousness in this universe? How is it that the physical laws and material of the universe lend themselves to conscious mind. It's staggering when you think about it, just the fact that you can know, that you are aware and that this universe was given to that happening.
|
|
Craig Fry
Trad climber
So Cal.
|
|
Ask yourself how is it that there is such a thing as consciousness in this universe?
There is absolutely no Consciousness in this Universe other than biological Consciousness.
Why should there be?
What is the evidence that there is?
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
There is absolutely no Consciousness in this Universe other than biological Consciousness.
Why should there be?
Again, that's irrelevant. And your statement is a statement of faith based on a rather finite set of experiences as the entire universe is far beyond your experience.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!