Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2014 - 12:25pm PT
|
Then why all you atheists give so many foolish ideologies.
You have not opened the door yet.
The doors are very closed.
There are many powerful lions protecting the doors.
No pussy material lab coat created device can ever protect you from these lions.
The powerful lions protecting the doors are only opened to the intelligent class.
Atheistic class is in poor fund of knowledge and the lions will devour your ignorance
and spit you back out into the endless cycle of the material world of birth death disease and old age ......
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2014 - 12:30pm PT
|
No more ideologies, please.
Amen, brother! First thing you've said in a long time I actually understood...
Nonsense.
We can no more rid ourselves of ideologies than we can desires or thoughts. Or ideas. Indeed, they contribute essentially to who we are as H. sapiens.
Perhaps you all need to review the basic definition, or definitions, of ideology.
Ideas, for better or worse...
Ideologies, for better or worse...
What a funny bunch here.
.....
|
|
Marlow
Sport climber
OSLO
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2014 - 12:41pm PT
|
The scientific method is no idelogy. It's a collection of tools developed to differentiate facts from illusions. Often perversely used in America because money and fame counts more than differentiating fact from illusion even within the socalled scientific communities. WBraun's scientific method is no scientific method. It's only a reframing of what's science to serve as a tool to WBraun's wit and framing of the world...
I have a certain sympathy for WBraun's hermetical way of framing the world, his ideology...
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2014 - 01:58pm PT
|
WB: . . . pussy material lab coat . . . .
That one cracked me up.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2014 - 02:18pm PT
|
Marlow -- "It's a collection of tools developed to differentiate facts from illusions."
The real fact is: You don't even know who you really are yet you claim facts.
The illusionary gross material energies, Maya, have completely overpowered you unbeknownst to yourself.
Just as the living entities fall under the illusion that they are their gross material bodies.
Falsely identifying their material bodies as the the self they remain on the path of bewilderment.
The foolish so called rubber stamps himself as a scientist HFCS foolishly deludes himself along with his
so colleagues as victims of the powerful mayadevi who keep the the HFCS's of the material world in bondage to those illusionary energies.
Thus they mislead not only themselves but along with everyone else that comes in contact with their defective consciousness.
Thus they ultimately make such stupid claims "No one ultimately knows" as they themselves have made contact
with every living being in the entire cosmic manifestation .....
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2014 - 02:26pm PT
|
Yes ... like your stupid Govt in the past and present administrations.
Millions have been killed and are still being killed for the illusionary religion of material
capitalism, communism so called democracy along with all the rest of these material "ism" designations.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2014 - 02:51pm PT
|
if the Wern didn't call me stupid I'd assume the Mother Ship had finally policed him back off the planet.
|
|
Byran
climber
San Jose, CA
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2014 - 05:28pm PT
|
Since I wasted my time watching that Alvin Plantinga video (posted on the previous page), I guess I can also waste my time responding to it. So here you go.
The first part of his argument centers on the lack of evidence for "unguided evolution". Basically, since no one can show that a Christian God doesn't guide evolution, then we really can't say one way or the other. This puts unguided evolution on the same footing as divinely guided evolution, either is possible, or so he says. This argument is a lame attempt to shift the burden of proof to the other side, but using this type of logic is silly when you think about it. There is no evidence that King Luis IV secretly invented Lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) in the year 938 AD. But wait! There's also no evidence that King Luis IV didn't secretly invent LSD. Therefore, either of these propositions is equally possible right? Maybe he did, maybe he didn't, we just don't know! And perhaps we should also revise the public school books to offer this alternative theory that Luis IV was the first to synthesize the LSD compound, not Albert Hofmann. Bottom line, if you want to claim that God has a guiding hand in evolution, then you need to provide some measure of evidence that God (a) exists, and (b) actually has a guiding hand in evolution. Anything less is argumentum ad ignorantiam.
The second point in the video is I think more interesting, only because it's not one that I've heard a million times. After first attempting to redefine science to decouple it from naturalism, he goes on to couch his argument in mathematical terms (for more legitimacy, I guess). He claims that if we live in a naturalistic world, and evolution is true, then there is a low probability that our cognitive faculties are reliable. And since the theories of naturalism and evolution are predicated on our cognitive functions (observation, reasoning, ect...) then the argument that 'both evolution and naturalism are true' is a self-defeating one. The reasoning behind this he gives is that in a naturalistic evolving world, all "thoughts" and "subjective experience" are irrelevant. All that matters is the cause and effect outcome of neurological processes (which he seems to regard as automated and unrelated to "thoughts"). The frog snaps out its tongue to catch the fly, but what the frog is thinking or experiencing at that moment is irrelevant to evolution, and therefore thoughts have no evolutionary basis for matching reality, in his opinion.
First of all, the nervous system is responsible for a variety of operations. Some of these operations are automatic and do not require or result in anything resembling "consciousness". Your heart beats, you shiver when cold, sweat when hot, yawn when tired, and your arsehole puckers on a runout climb, all without you having to "think" about it. Some functions of the nervous system can be controlled by your consciousness, but will also happen automatically if your attention is elsewhere - in addition to some of the previous, this category includes breathing, blinking your eyes, laughing, frowning, "nervous ticks" and other impulses - basically anything that poker players aim to control in themselves and recognize in their competitors.
Then finally there is the stuff which actually requires cognitive thought. Cognition isn't cheap. Brainpower requires a lot of energy, and so it's mainly reserved for very complex and creative actions relative to the type of mundane actions which are automated. Something like hunting could be automated. In the case of the frog, perhaps it does catch the fly in what is purely a reflexive action, and doesn't require any thought process or awareness of what it is doing. But when a human goes out hunting bison, it is to their advantage that they have big brains capable of memory storage (last week we saw the heard heading east through that valley), and that they can develop strategies, teach these strategies to others and adjust their strategies at any moment. This processing of information and memory recollection is what results in the subjective experience (at least as far as we know), and this finally brings me to my point: cognition is directly tied to action. Plantinga paints a picture of naturalism where the actions of your body are governed by cause and effect and consciousness is just window-dressing which has nothing to do with any of it. This is entirely wrong. If the hunter doesn't correctly remember which valley the bison were last in, then his tribe starves. People act off of what they "think". The reliability of our cognitive faculties is selected for, and shaped by, evolution because cognition is necessary for certain complex and improvisational actions.
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2014 - 08:25pm PT
|
hunting could be automated.
i don't think he said hunting was automated like breathing, or sweating and so on. Jus the act of flicking the tongue out to catch the fly was automatic. The frog could be thinking about anything he wants, like QM. And it doesn't matter what he believes about the whole predicament. He's solely working of evolution's biological cause/effect. Evolution doesn't care what any animal thinks, ONLY how he behaves! If the mind is working well enough to keep all its limbs feeding the body, it'll be healthy enough to reproduce. Thus Evolution.
For one minute cant you imagine the frog sitting there, waiting, waiting, waiting for the fly and thinking, "Man i wish i had wings"
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2014 - 10:08pm PT
|
For one minute can't you imagine the frog sitting there, waiting, waiting, waiting for the fly and thinking,
No they can't do that.
IF so "they" would have to acknowledge the existence of the soul and God.
"They" have to make sure that doesn't happen and stays in their so called "Theory".
Theory means ultimately they do not know and since "they" do not know no one else can possible know since "they" are the ultimate.
In the future "they" and only "they" will know just as "they" are telling everyone now how it is.
And only "they" are right although "they" keep saying no one knows.
"They" are hypocrites who only quarrel with their own selves .....
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2014 - 06:34am PT
|
Thanks for the thoughtful post, Byran/Bryan. Cognition is put to some strange uses these days. Maybe if the energy were harder to come by...
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2014 - 08:03am PT
|
Byran, I agree. I've studied Plantinga in the past, he's a waste of time after a while.
I did enjoy his solipsism story though. :)
.....
“Paradise is open to all of God’s creatures.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/12/world/europe/dogs-in-heaven-pope-leaves-pearly-gate-open-.html
.....
Theory means ultimately they do not know...
Not a very good point. Certainly not a very clear one. :(
.....
Back to square one, I guess. Science is the best modeler for how the world works, also for how life works. If this claim is not true show me - show the world - a better model.
When in doubt, in times of doubt, simply look around. Look to such items as passenger jets at 40k, man-made vehicles on comets 30 light-minutes away or hip replacements and heart transplants, ebola safety measures, communications that started with a couple wires and voice coil and battery just a handful of generations ago and now after truly mind blowing growth and dvt communications that extend to all points of the globe at lightning speed. My my, what some take for granted while dissing science. :(
Come to think of it, maybe we should engage in something of a little scientism if it means a platform or place where some can meet to celebrate science and its successes apart from all the dissing.
All those countless, incredible science and engineering achievements that have lifted us out of the medieval age (ala the Münster Rebellion, etc.) not to mention the pleistocene - they are the proof in the pudding (accessible to reflection any time) for people when in doubt (e.g., when high at a Plantinga lecture, lol). But I've come to think maybe a person actually has to be raised in the science stuff for years and years and years to really get it, the nature rules (that they rule) and science descriptions and their value, in other words, years and years and years to offset a person's primate primal base impulses and early formative acculturation of wanting/expecting his world and his own being to be something else.
.....
Speaking of ideology...
Consider the Münster Rebellion. There's an example of a few (ideologies) at odds. For worse. We're doing better today.
http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-48-prophets-of-doom/
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2014 - 08:38am PT
|
Evolution is a result. A result.
you say that like there was a problem to solve. So the frogs tongue is a result of the fly flying high?
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2014 - 08:59am PT
|
HFCS: Science is the best modeler for how the world works, also for how life works. If this claim is not true show me - show the world - a better model.
This statement is confused; perhaps petitio principii.
Quantified modeling IS science. If it’s not true, you want to be shown with a better model.
If there is to be a new way of seeing and being, then it will need to move beyond what you know. That might mean the very modeling that you hold sacred. Your arguments against myth and magic and even archaic consciousness (essentially deep sleep) is that each era’s mediums or methods of understanding the world and self are not accurate or complete (as verified by the strength of replicability). Different structures of consciousness (the imagination of myth, or mental-rational conceptualizations, or the emotionalism of magic) are regulative filters or means by which to understand the world. Each has its pros and cons; each is incomplete; each shines its own light on reality yet creates its own shadows; each provides an illusion of its own.
No one can be right by assuming any one of these structures of consciousness alone; perhaps at best, what presents a larger and more inclusive picture (underscoring multi-pluralism, multiculturalism, a more post modern sympathy) is to take them all in at once.
But, of course, that is very difficult to do. Our modern minds find it very difficult to entertain multiple views at the same time. It’s hard. Look at any optical illusion, and try to see both images at the same time. The mind doesn’t want to do it. But it can be done if you relax your constraints of what you allow an “object” to be. In other words, open your mind.
We want to the “whole person” served. You can think about what a “whole person” might be. You can also think (feel, sense, dream, intuit) what context a “whole person” would find him or herself in. Change what “a person” is changes the world.
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2014 - 09:18am PT
|
Nice answer DMT. Thanks for your result!
must go to work now, Urrr
it's raining in JTree!
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2014 - 09:21am PT
|
A benefit of science: awareness of killer asteroids.
A benefit of engineering: solving the problem of killer asteroids.
A vital interest of humanity: solving the problem of killer asteroids.
http://www.asteroidday.org/
#AsteroidDay
.....
These re first person views. First person views do not drive evolution, imo. Your thoughts, individually, mine, HCFS, Jan's, Werner's, et al, none of our individual thoughts drive the result of evolution.
Because perception, thought, belief lead to behavior, like the latter they are selected for or selected against. So like all phenotypes, they are at once drivers and drivees of evolution by natural selection.
Our "views" are "extended" phenotypes (expressions of our genes, genetics). Natural Selection (evolution) acts on phenotypes.
.....
Many old white men can be found here...
http://www.asteroidday.org/signatories-list
.....
THE 100X ASTEROID DECLARATION IS AS FOLLOWS:
As scientists and citizens, we strive to solve humanity’s greatest challenges to safeguard our families and quality of life on Earth in the future.
Asteroids impact Earth: such events, without intervention, will cause great harm to our societies, communities and families around the globe. Unlike other natural disasters, we know how to prevent asteroid impacts.
There are a million asteroids in our solar system that have the potential to strike Earth and destroy a city, yet we have discovered less than 10,000 — just one percent — of them. We have the technology to change that situation.
Therefore, we, the undersigned, call for the following action:
Employ available technology to detect and track Near-Earth Asteroids that threaten human populations via governments and private and philanthropic organisations.
A rapid hundred-fold (100x) acceleration of the discovery and tracking of Near-Earth Asteroids to 100,000 per year within the next ten years.
Global adoption of Asteroid Day, heightening awareness of the asteroid hazard and our efforts to prevent impacts, on June 30, 2015.
I declare that I share the concerns of this esteemed community of astronauts, scientists, business leaders, artists and concerned citizens to raise awareness about protecting and preserving life on our planet by preventing future asteroid impacts.
http://www.asteroidday.org/
Join the movement, it's yet another great way to support and celebrate actionable science, too. :)
You all should know this man above!
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2014 - 10:33am PT
|
A good question to ponder, I'd say, is...
should we distinguish (begin to distinguish more) between (1) science and (2) actionable science (aka applied science)? Seems to me this is often a source of confusion.
Arguably science at base is independent of goals or values. As stated many times, it is concerned with "what is." Just the facts, ma'am. Meanwhile, actionable science (aka applied science) like medicine and engineering concerns interests, values, goals, too (what matters). And where these are involved you also get strategy, policy, planning (what works, for better or worse).
Despite the richness of the English lexicon, sometimes the so-called "poverty of language" as many have pointed out can be problematic. This is probably one of those areas. It's really too bad the English language doesn't have a single solitary word already for "actionable science."
Earlier, there was mention of "ideology." Of course "actionable science" (ytbniel: yet to be named in English language) comprised in part of interests, values and/or goals would be ideological (an ideology). Like ideology, there would be good and bad examples of ytbniel (ie., actionable science) in terms of "what matters" and "what works." Note that these are already issues or concerns of medicine and engineering.
A habit (expressed in conversation, too) of distinguishing between (1) science and (2) actionable science might go a long way to eliminating a lot of unnecessary misunderstanding and disagreement. Maybe the future will endure to see this. We can hope.
.....
Science, Religion and Culture
I do think this would be an excellent thread title. Or this...
Science, Culture and Belief
(as the world and its cultures move beyond religion and theism to other platforms of belief)
So when this thread is nuked...
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2014 - 11:26am PT
|
There are a million asteroids in our solar system that have the potential to strike Earth and destroy a city, yet we have discovered less than 10,000 — just one percent — of them. We have the technology to change that situation.
Therefore, we, the undersigned, call for the following action:
talk about a fear based belief system/religion..ha. It's enough to make one wonder
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2014 - 11:38am PT
|
Some gods we can see and feel:
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2014 - 12:19pm PT
|
We might build long distance sweat boxes, but the bulk of humanity's not going anywhere.
It's easier to move the earth further out with repeated asteroid gravitational assist maneuvers than to relocate a bunch of hairless monkeys anywhere. That buys us a few extra billion years or so - if sun swelling is the only threat considered.
Terraforming Mars isn't much of an option - small problem of no protective magnetic field. That's kind of hard to fake.
If we don't do anything we're toast in 250 million years or so - the sun's gettin' warmer. After that, there won't be any water left here.
Yup, life is nearing the tail end of its ride on this rock unless us humans step forward and alter that.
Weird, huh?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!