Politics, God and Religion vs. Science

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 14801 - 14820 of total 23481 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
May 4, 2013 - 06:54pm PT
Morality comes from where?





a physical substance starts a causal chain through chemical reactions that affects the brain through the signaling of neurons and results in a "religious experience" usually described by "subjective" language as originating from the "supernatural" domain...


 Just watched a video this morning that got me to thinking.. Isn't just about everything in this life having to do with chemicals: the air we breath, the water we drink, the food we eat, the keys to the car….. everything…

So then, isn't everything a chemical reaction of one kind or another?

BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
May 4, 2013 - 07:19pm PT
I'm not trying to be a jerk about it. I simply need some compelling evidence.

Give me a miracle. Show me 2 loaves of bread feeding hundreds, with zero trickery.

Same with JL. He still can't explain his ground. Everyone of his posts is a snippet from a prior statement and then saying it is wrong.

If he is that far out there, then he needs to report back in a long and lucid post.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
May 4, 2013 - 07:24pm PT
But this modulating and calibrating ,which the brain and the nervous system automatically performs, comes about ex post facto . All the elements that make up an object are already there in the external world : The light reflecting off its surface conveying color, size, dimension, the sound of it movement.


Nope, you're still missing it - and this is subtle, and I can tell by your presentational style that you'd bet the farm that you're take on this is inviolate, so it might be hard to see past your blind spot.

Where you loose your way is in assuming that "all the elements that make up an object are already there in the external world." This is true, providing a sentient being has exactly our set of sense organs and physical characteristics and makeup. But consider some other life form which, for example, evolved with a much more porous form and could effortlessly glide through solid rock, or which has no auditory capacities, or sees in a totally different way. Forms that we consider indelibly "out there" like a rock are meaningless to someone who can glide through granite like so many cosmic rays.

But the belief that virtially all objective reality is entirely based on matter (making you a so-called fundamentalist-physicalist) is rampant, especially amongst those whose principal mode of inquiry is measuring, and who quite naturally believe all phenomenon, no matter how qualitatively different than atomic particles themselves, are nonetheless "produced" or created by or are in some wise blow-back from atomic stirrings.

IME, such people have to have profound direct experiences to ever unroot their devotion to fundy physicalism, and lacking same, there is simply no arguing with them on this point because only physical evidence is considered real, hence their closed loop of inquiry.

JL
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Potemkin Village
May 4, 2013 - 07:43pm PT
Please read and spread this fantastic article on "Islamophobia":

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-a-rizvi/an-atheist-muslims-perspective-on-the-root-causes-of-islamist-jihadism-and-the-politics-of-islamophobia_b_3159286.html
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
May 4, 2013 - 08:04pm PT
If he is that far out there....

MikeL

climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
May 4, 2013 - 08:24pm PT
Hmmmm.

What shall count as evidence? Only the 5 senses? Must one perceive what exists with their own senses?

All of you are on shaky ground (and I think you know it).
TomCochrane

Trad climber
Santa Cruz Mountains and Monterey Bay
May 4, 2013 - 08:26pm PT
Those who are wishing for participation on this thread of a professional neurophysiologist are unaware of the vast resources that have been poured into this subject throughout our lifetimes behind a veil of top secrecy, due to the overwhelming military and social control implications of the subject. I won't make any claims to professional expertise in this area, other than having been interested in it all my life.

Child development specialists have long considered that it takes an average of seven years for any child to develop the personality that will be theirs for life. So a child exposed to television, computer games, and constant radio and audio electronics is highly impressionable, and susceptible to multiple personality disorder.

Further, the personality of a child less than seven is too fragile to absorb life threatening trauma without reacting in some fashion. Obviously not all children react to early trauma by dissociating, but those who do develop psychological entities which are different than those created at an older age.

So to further explain: in the mind of a person with multiple personality disorder there is a part of the mind that assumes the role of the inter self helper between these multiple personalities. In the younger group, the first entity to dissociate from the birth personality serves the function of this inter self helper, usually based upon whatever the child has been constantly exposed to. You can imagine this personality as a television hero role model, a Disney character, a Pokemon, an anime character, or a religious entity.

The ‘mind’ that is left can be called the original personality. The inter self helper is then the creator of all subsequent alter-personalities, no matter what type. The inter self helper creates them to assure the physical survival of the child, who is known to the inter self helper as his/her “charge". Some adults evolve through phases of creating a series of different role models, such as religious figures, gurus, or scientific role models. And some adults go through their entire lives holding on to an early role model, in the face of any amount of contradictory evidence.

Prior to this first source of inspiration, is the ‘still small voice within’ which I prefer to call the essence of the patient. The inter self helper role is only a temporary job assignment for the essence, which desires to return to an original state of unity within the multiple’s mind.

In the case of the multiple personality disorder, the second dissociate entity to form would be the false-front alter personality, or 'social personality'. This must be created by the inter self helper to replace the original personality which has been deemed by the inter self helper to be too inadequate to stay in social control of the body.

This first false-front is designed and manufactured by the inter self helper to present an image to an abusive adult which will assure survival. It may be made completely compliant, cooperative without crying, and able to absorb abuse without responding angrily. This will be the child the abusive adult can continue to abuse without any adverse reactions being exhibited. This child can then be preprogrammed and triggered as a spy or rock star or assassin or sex toy or any other social role deemed valuable to the handlers.

In other words, if a child’s first major psycho-sexual-physical assault take place before seven years old (impressionistic stage), the birth personality inter self helper acts as a monitor/conductor to split off alternative front personalities (dissociates) according to additional programmed stresses with sufficient trauma to dissociate, each of which are highly hypnotizable.

So when mind-control scientists start working on a child at such a young age, she should be a true multiple personality cyborg. True multiple personality cyborgs are more reliable, malleable and manageable than dissociative identity disorder human cybernetic computer systems. The news is full of the actions of these human manchurian candidates. Their handlers are people whose philosophy justifies any actions in order to further their central control of society.

So the mystery worth discussing here is what happens when the multiple personality disorder cyborg person is provided with an environment where it is safe for them to regain contact with their original personality. It is this original personality that represents the core discussion here, and all the rest is distraction.
MikeL

climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
May 4, 2013 - 08:28pm PT
Same with JL. He still can't explain his ground.


Not true. John has continually said that everything that exists, exists in his consciousness. That includes objectivity. Nothing exists outside of consciousness. If it does, how could one possibly know for sure?
MikeL

climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
May 4, 2013 - 08:32pm PT
^^^^^

No, Ed, you've said so yourself. The results are only provisional, "as if." You know enough to know that no one can prove anything but one thing: I AM. I AM is totally self-evident. The rest is provisional and treated "as if."
MikeL

climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
May 4, 2013 - 08:33pm PT
Again, what counts as evidence, . . . . . please.
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
May 4, 2013 - 08:39pm PT
Is it solipsistic in here, or is it just me?
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - May 4, 2013 - 09:22pm PT
Nothing exists outside of consciousness. If it does, how could one possibly know for sure?

We all know that Everything we see and experience exists, because of as a collective, we can acknowledge it exists as a consensus.

I doesn't matter what humans can experience through their senses, sure there is more than we can ever see or experience something, but we CAN KNOW that something exists, through repeatable scientific observations...

Like this cactus
Credit: Dr. F.


It exists, not just in my senses, or just MikeL.'s computer screen. We can take a survey of others that could experience it, and we can conclude that IT DOES Exist.
We can say that what MikeL. claims, is wrong
It does exist Outside of consciousness, along with everything else we experience as a collective, like TV, books, the internet.... it's all real
Jan

Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
May 4, 2013 - 09:30pm PT
Appropo to this thread is another one that Ed has started, called the climber as visionary. It is an interesting combination of science and art.

http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.php?topic_id=112350&tn=0#msg2131165
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - May 4, 2013 - 09:42pm PT
Credit: Dr. F.
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
May 4, 2013 - 10:11pm PT
Nope, you're still missing it - and this is subtle, and I can tell by your presentational style that you'd bet the farm that you're take on this is inviolate, so it might be hard to see past your blind spot.

Au contraire mon frere, I am highly resilient in seeing either through or around any detected blind spot I might have on this , or any other subject. But this is not about me, or my presentational style.

I have thought about this matter across several facets and I am convinced that human consciousness is a master sargeant to the four star general of the physical world. This does not necessarily mean that I put purely corporeal reality on some sort of pedestal. Or even that it guides my entire philosophical and intellectual life.

The very demonstrable fact that humans have inhabited this mortal coil , this vail of tears ,for only a few hundred thousand years, tells me that we are recent visitors to a long established reality, not the producers of it. We cannot declare to the cosmos: " Who's your daddy?" A better question for us might be : "are you my daddy?"

Religionists, perhaps have answered the daddy question, but the rest of us , unsatisfied ,continue to look. We might discover consciousness, subjective experience, philosophy, or even science as the answer to the question, but we are never quite sure. This is why we argue and contend with one another. If we get a whiff of over-certainty or unabashed confidence over these matters, in our polemical compatriots, then we are annoyed on some level. Polemics based upon a sort of exalted and reverential uncertainty is the coin of our realm.
Jan

Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
May 4, 2013 - 10:20pm PT
We might discover consciousness, subjective experience, philosophy, or even science as the answer to the question, but we are never quite sure. This is why we argue and contend with one another. If we get a whiff of over-certainty or unabashed confidence over these matters, in our polemical compatriots, then we are annoyed on some level. Polemics based upon a sort of exalted and reverential uncertainty is the coin of our realm.

So well put. And didn't this used to be called humility, one of the touted virtues of most religious and philsophical systems, not to mention scientific inquiry?
MH2

climber
May 4, 2013 - 11:23pm PT
And didn't this used to be called humility, one of the touted virtues of most religious and philsophical systems, not to mention scientific inquiry.


Scientists are more often than not humble. It comes with the territory.
rSin

climber
calif
May 5, 2013 - 12:17am PT
and just when we need them to be lobbiests...
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
May 5, 2013 - 01:16am PT
Any test, empirical or otherwise, can only be known, conceived, documented, and demonstrated by way of our own consciousness. No experiment, no matter how empirical, can possibly exist outside of the consciousness that conceived of it.

If so, who exactly would be conducting said experiment, where, how, and what agency would tally the results? That's not to say human consciousness "creates" physical reality, only our Hilbert space version of the things we call objective reality. The underlying undifferentiated soup is truly there. But if it's both wave/energy and stuff, the absolute thingness of it is debatable, it would seem.

-
He wrote: I have thought about this matter across several facets and I am convinced that human consciousness is a master sargeant to the four star general of the physical world.

--

In other words, simple physicalism, whereby consciousness is generated by matter, somehow. That will never be demonstrated - you can be certain of it. Objective functioning can be traced to bio antecedents, but not so consciousness itself. If you say the subjective and the objective are the same, and that raises all kinds of impossibilities.

What you're stumbling over is the belief that consciousness is local, situated only in humans. That is, subjectivity and experience is a kind of
brain artifact, whereby the "daddy" is in fact the meat brain itself, meaning that the four star general (matter) sources the subjective (also known as the "transmission model"). I wager that until you have direct corrective experiences to the contrary you will grip this belief with fundamentalist vigor.

JL
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
May 5, 2013 - 02:03am PT
That will never be demonstrated - you can be certain of it

It is demonstrated daily by the death of individuals. Once the person ceases physical life consciousness disappears. If consciousness were not located in the biological entity, this would not be true.

I am not suggesting here that consciousness may not persevere. But not in the physical world as we presently understand it.

If a person dies tomorrow you cannot demonstrate that his/her consciousness resides somewhere. Therefore consciousness has ceased with the death of the biological being therefore there is a fundamentally synonomous connection between biological functioning and consciousness.
I am saying here that biological functioning generates consciousness as far as we know at this time.
I hope I am wrong ,as a matter of fact. I think that it would be mighty cool to discover that an individuals unique consciousness goes on beyond the untimely demise of their biologic functioning.
However at this time I a-gonna have to go with the "consciousness is generated by the brain"
whether its meat or fish or vegetable.

. I wager that until you have direct corrective experiences to the contrary you will grip this belief

I hope you are right .
But you have not demonstrated any logical premise or demonstrable empiricism that would point irrefutably to this.
Why?
Why is the validity of subjective experience and objective logic mutually exclusive?
Why must a deterministic jihad be launched against objective reasoning in order to establish the validity of the subjective experience?( and vice versa, for that matter)
This is radical subjectivism at its most inflexible and dogmatic.
A type of philosophical bunker mentality.

I will give you this much:
You are consistent , devoted, unwavering, and insistent.
Messages 14801 - 14820 of total 23481 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews