Politics, God and Religion vs. Science

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 22641 - 22653 of total 22653 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Sep 15, 2014 - 07:32pm PT
A long-established "thought distortion." What's more, people struggle to get their head around a way to experience mind that is purely empirical but that does not involve instrumentation. That alone is a curious thing to investigate.

 JL... A tool for thought...maybe?

http://www.thefloatcenter.com/floating.html

Floating in a floatation tank creates a level of virtual weightlessness, removes external physical stimuli, (sensory deprivation) and allows your mind to drift into the deepest possible level of sensory relaxation. After an hour in the floatation tank you'll feel positively refreshed, rejuvenated and calm. Floatation tank therapy results in ultimate stress reduction that improves the immune system. Floating slows down your heart rate, brain waves and slightly lowers your blood pressure. Floating helps remove toxins from the body, and reduces your cortisol level and increases circulation. In addition Epsom salt has been used for centuries for its many healing properties.

I contend that nothing happens in the tank...
But that you fully experience everything that happens in the tank...

Begs the questions: What is real and what is imagined?

We can go on metphorical journeys... and that's fun and all... but will it get me any nearer to knowing the experience of a float...

I tend to apply this flawed thinking to the notion that there is a life after death that the believers like to claim is their experience or something... It has never worked for me...


Or, if you really want to take the mind to the next metaphorical level... Try http://www.ayahuasca.com/... I've only heard expansion words used after the experience, so I can only imagine people's heads got bigger or something...
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Sep 15, 2014 - 08:09pm PT
Jingy, I am not talking about metaphorical data. Nor yet "stuff."

And MH2, we all know your tendency to be contrary, to take an opposing side just to feel like you're in the game. Per:

"The fact that all of this data can be observed without being emeshed in it is the science and art of the experiential adventures. (JL)"

This is woo, for lack of a better word. Care to share your data?
--


By what set of experiences are you basing your appraisal? Define "woo." And given that you don't expect something for nothing, what are you willing to do to arrive at said data, save for begging others for what you do not, aparently, have.

Lastly, if you are doubting that the mind, when coinsciously directed, is capible of detaching or breaking enmeshment to content, we can hardly expect a verbal explanation from me to revise your beliefs about the process. However if you are taking an honest tact, instead of simply kicking up dust, I can describe the process by which you can arrive at your own data. It will likely be way off at first, but with enough peer reviewing, you can eventually get some clarity on the subject and move it out past the woo in your mind and into the solid stuff. But again the question remains - how valuable is this to you, to revise your own understanding on these basic issues, and what are YOU willing to do to attain some clarity on them. The reason I ask is that for the most part on this thread, people talk a big game but they don't actually rope up, so to speak, and start pulling down.

JL
MH2

climber
Sep 15, 2014 - 08:55pm PT
Bluster
jstan

climber
Sep 15, 2014 - 10:07pm PT
I'll bite.

Do you have reason to suspect there are neanderthals on ST?
JAN

Jan:
That was a real question I asked. Turing like maybe, but a real question. Last I heard DNA penetration of Homo Sapiens was quoted at a few percent. That specie was successful for 400,000 years under horrible conditions and they had many cultural traits similar or superior to us. They may have died out only because our leverage launched spears finished off the mammoth, leaving them nothing to eat. Just like we did with the bison. Homo sapiens is pretty nasty.
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Sep 15, 2014 - 10:24pm PT

That specie was successful for 400,000 years under horrible conditions and they had many cultural traits similar or superior to us.

That's some faith!



Do you think modern Homo's will last 400,000 yrs?

Why not?
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Sep 15, 2014 - 10:28pm PT
Now now, to be precise, 3% on ST should have at least some neanderthal genes. That means (theorizing before the data here) that 97% should be fully human?

There are two things incorrect with the above statement.

1. If you are of European or Asian ancestry you will have 1 -4 % genetic material sourced from Neanderthals. This would represent more than 3% of the ST sample.

2. There is no such thing as "fully human" in the genetic context being discussed here unless one is prepared to make the case that an individual who can be tested to possess no Neanderthal heritage is more fully human than one who does possess Neanderthal.

400,000 years under horrible conditions and they had many cultural traits similar or superior to us. They may have died out only because our leverage launched spears finished off the mammoth, leaving them nothing to eat. Just like we did with the bison. Homo sapiens is pretty nasty.

Neanderthals probably did not possess "similar or superior" cultural traits to modern humans.
The only evidence of such culture is known as " Mousterian " and is notable for not having changed all that much over hundreds of thousands of years---which has traditionally led many researchers to regard Neanderthals as having been stuck in somewhat of a rut ---since their tool culture did not show evidence of much progression.

Neanderthals do show evidence of several interesting physical adaptions to be compared favorably to modern humans. For instance , their brains were larger. This is now thought to result from neuroanatomical adaptions primarily in the vision processing regions of their brains in order to cope with the severely reduced light during the advanced glacial period they endured in Europe and elsewhere.
They were also very much more muscular. A lone Neanderthal male in prime condition would probably have very little to worry about up against several unarmed humans.

A note on the demise of Neanderthals: the dates now commonly agreed upon for the large scale disappearance of Neanderthals keeps getting pushed back and now stands at roughly 35--40,ooo years ago, with perhaps some remnant populations hanging on until 30,ooo ,
Modern humans possible role in that disappearance is still hotly debated and no firm consensus has been arrived at. I might add that the scenario of modern humans being held primarily responsible for Neanderthal extinction has been loosing ground in recent years.
jstan

climber
Sep 15, 2014 - 10:36pm PT
That specie was successful for 400,000 years under horrible conditions and they had many cultural traits similar or superior to us.

That's some faith! BB

Blu do you read before you post?

We have veterans who suffered in the service but we make them wait months to see a doctor. Neanderthal males suffered many broken bones in the pursuit of game for the public good, and it appears they were well cared for, under very pressing conditions. And they achieved mortality rates for Downs sufferers as good as do we. Limited data, but this is what it is.

Our egos are so grand we consider neanderthal to be less. Like we consider animals to be less. Without a shred of real data.

If you are looking for data as to how primitive we are, you need not look far.

No need to discuss our habit of praying to spirits who we expect to defeat our enemies for us even when we can't make any case at all for ourselves being fair or "compassionate".
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Sep 15, 2014 - 10:54pm PT
Sorry guys. I took the whole thing as a joke, especially when jgill made his comment about dangling the bait in front of me. Tvash seemed to take it as a joke also.

Now seriously, 3 or 4 % of neanderthal genes in the European population and some in the west Asian (I haven't seen the exact figures) is not a lot, but that it exists at all, was a big surprise. Homo Denisova, a relative of neanderthal probably has more descendants in Asia, including the recent surprise discovery that their closest match are the Sherpa.

Homo sapiens is said to be fully human whereas other ancestors were not as fully human either because their brain size was smaller, or in the case of the neanderthal, actually larger than H. sapiens, yet their tools and art are not as developed. As jstan points out (seriously for sure this time), neanderthal went to great lengths to take care of their own and seem to have been nicer than many Homo sapiens, although there are those nagging questions about the cannibalism that some practiced.

Sometimes fully human is synonymous with modern human, for although neanderthal had a larger brain (ave 1,500 cc vs 1,300 cc on the average), the shape and placement of the brain was quite different. The neanderthal head was more elongated, making childbirth harder and perhaps contributing to their demise. Homo sapiens developed a high forehead and stacked brains on top, which makes for a narrower head in the birth canal, a superior adaptation. Someday if we survive long enough, we too will be looked upon as less than fully human compared to the H. sapiens of the future.

And finally, anyone can take a DNA test now to see if they carry neanderthal genes.
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Sep 15, 2014 - 11:00pm PT
neanderthal went to great lengths to take care of their own and seem to have been nicer than many Homo sapiens,

There is no evidence to support that statement.

although there are those nagging questions about the cannibalism that some practiced.

The only evidence of Neanderthal cannibalism I'm aware of was found in the El Sidron cave complex in Asturias in northern Spain. Conditions during that period( 50,ooo years ago and before the arrival of modern humans )were extremely harsh and resulted in increasing isolation of Neanderthal groups with a rapidly diminishing food supply. An anomalous situation not to be taken as indicative of normal Neanderthal culture or practices---as it also would not be in the case of most human groups.
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Sep 15, 2014 - 11:06pm PT
What about the old man with a withered arm who would have been pretty useless for hunting with only one good arm who nevertheless survived into old age? Or the original type specimen who was badly crippled by arthritis? Contrast that with some modern day hunters and gathers who until recently left old people out to be exposed and die. Not only did neanderthals seem to have a food surplus, but also a lot of compassion.
jstan

climber
Sep 15, 2014 - 11:08pm PT
Jan:
Have you ever thought talking to humans is a lot like going before the British Royal Mountaineering Society to tell them Whymper was not the only climber in the world?

I pick on Jan because she has a lot going on upstairs.
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Sep 15, 2014 - 11:14pm PT
Not only did neanderthals seem to have a food surplus, but also a lot of compassion.

Huh?

The neanderthal head was more elongated, making childbirth harder and perhaps contributing to their demise. Homo sapiens developed a high forehead and stacked brains on top, which makes for a narrower head in the birth canal, a superior adaptation.

Another highly dubious contention.
Probably false in fact.
I'm too lazy right now to debunk it.*sigh*

http://news.discovery.com/human/evolution/brains-neanderthals-humans.htm
paul roehl

Boulder climber
california
Sep 15, 2014 - 11:51pm PT
"Look, nobody can argue the certainty that deity/ god (depending on your definition) doesn’t exist."

Actually, one can very effectively argue this point using data - the complete evidence of absence for anything that might substantiate religious claims of past events, coupled with the frequency with which new religions that directly contradict each others claims are founded. The most likely hypothesis, when such evidence is examined, is that religion is an invention. You've just added the intellectually dishonest term 'with certainty' - which isn't what science does. Science does reject least likely hypotheses, and favors more likely ones - applying that process to religious claims is no different than for any other set of hypotheses. Sorry - religion doesn't get special treatment, however much the religious might prefer otherwise. As for gods that do not interact with our world in any way - that is a nonsensical claim, given that, by definition, it can never be tested. In other words, anything goes according to one's imagination.

THE ONLY INTELLECTUALY DISHONEST TERM HERE IS NONSENCIAL: THE FACT IS: THE TERM GOD HAS YET TO BE DEFINED ON THIS THREAD. IT IS SIMPLE: THERE IS NO PROOF (CERTAINTY), HOWEVER YOU DEFINE THAT TERM IN YOUR ADORATION FOR THE DEITY SCIENCE, AS TO THE EXISTENCE OR NON-EXISTENCE OF GOD. IF YOU HAVE “SAID” PROOF PLEASE SHARE.

"And… science does a piss poor job of reconciling the average human to the horrors that may well befall him on this planet."

General statement without an explanation, but most likely wrong again. Disease, divorce, death - an enormous amount of predictive data is available for those who seek it.

SCIENCE SEARCHES FOR WHAT IS. SCIENCE IS NOT INTERESTED IN WHETHER OR NOT “WHAT IS” RELIEVES YOUR ANXIETY OR ON A DEEPER LEVEL RECONCILES YOU WITH REGARD TO THE REMARKABLE TRAGEDIES OF THIS THING WE CALL LIFE. SCIENCE DOES NOT OFFER TO MAKE SENSE OF TRAGEDY. WHEN YOUR CHILD DIES SCIENCE WILL TELL YOU THE CAUSE WAS CANCER. WHEN YOU ASK THE SCIENTIST WHY WE ARE BORN INTO DEATH HE WILL EXPLAIN THE PROCESS OF DISEASE AND AGEING. SCIENCE OFFERS NO RECONCILLIATION TO THESE MATTERS.
SCIENCE CANNOT SAY TO THE GRIEVING PARENT “YOUR CHILD STILL LIVES.”

"Mythology/religion is born from the psyche as metaphor for understanding. Read these myths psychologically and they make sense and are useful whether you’re an ardent believer or not. To simply take them on their face is to misunderstand them completely."

Many religions make specific claims, fully intended to be 'taken on their face'. It's perfectly fine to use data to test those claims. They fall short every time.

HISTORICALLY GOD IS THE PRIMARY METAPHOR IN HUMAN THOUGHT. IT IS RARE AND THE GREAT EXCEPTION TO FIND A CULTURE THAT DOESN’T CELEBRATE ONE DEITY OR MANY. WHY IS IT THE NATURAL HUMAN PROCLIVITIE TO EXPECT A DIMENSION BEYOND THE FORMS OF SENSIBILITY? WHY DOES GOD HAVE SO MANY NAMES? HOW MANY DEITIES ARE CLAIMED WORLD WIDE? IF YOU READ THESE DEITIES AND THEIR ASSOCIATED MYTHS PSYCHOLOGICALLY YOU MIGHT DISCOVER SOMETHING BEYOND WHAT YOU SEE AS SILLY AND FIND INSTEAD THE PROFOUNDITY OF HUMAN NATURE. MY WHOLE POINT IS THAT MYTHOLOGICAL SYMBOLS ARE REVELATIONS IF THEY ARE READ PSYCHOLOGICALLY, AS METAPHORS.
READ LITERALLY THEY TOO OFTEN BECOME THE VEHICLES OF OPPRESION BUT THAT DOESN’T NEGATE THEIR VALUE. OF COURSE ONE SHOULD NEITHER KILL NOR DIE FOR A METAPHOR.

"To declare only through science and its method will human beings come to an understanding of the universe and their place in it is as faith based as any myth."

So far, science has proven incredibly effective at understanding what we do know of the universe. As for our place in it - that's an intellectually dishonest conflation, for it lies firmly in the realm of subjective, philosophical choice, and no one makes the claim that science is the only path, or even a path, to understanding or wisdom , there. Pure strawman in an attempt to toss science - a model which does make predictions that can be tested, into the same bucket as myth - a model that cannot. Unless you're referring to the more pedestrian definition of our location relative to what's around us. We know a lot about that.

SINCE WHEN IS IT AN “INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST CONFLATION” (VTL) TO QUESTION OR TRY AND UNDERSTAND OUR PLACE IN THE UNIVERSE?
YES, SCIENCE ALLOWS A PEDESTRIAN UNDERSTANDING OF SUCH MATTERS BUT REMAINS SILENT WHEN WE ASK WHY, AND WHAT THE HUMAN SOUL/IMAGINATION DEMANDS ARE FAR DEEPER AND MORE SATISFYING ANSWERS. AN ATTEMPT AT THOSE ANSWERS CAN BE FOUND IN A MYRIAD OF MYTHS WORLD WIDE AND IN THOSE MYTHS CAN BE FOUND A KIND OF WISDOM THAT SCIENCE MAY NEVER BE ABLE TO ACHIEVE. THIS THREAD IS NOTHING IF NOT A COMPARISON OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION. I WOULD DISCREDIT NEITHER. THEY BOTH HAVE THEIR PLACE. BUT TO DISPARAGE THE MYTHOLOGIES OF THE HUMAN RACE, MYTHOLOGIES REFLECTING THIRTY THOUSAND YEARS OF HUMAN SELF REFLECTION AS WORTHLESS GIBBERISH INCLINING US TO DESPOTISM IS PLAINLY STUPID.

"Who knows what might supersede science as a revelatory discipline in a universe of infinite dimensions.:"

The universe has infinite dimensions? Sounds like heady stuff, but really, how could you possibly claim to know that?

I’M NOT CLAIMING TO KNOW ANYTHING, HOWEVER FROM MY CHAIR HERE IN THIS LITTLE TOWN THE UNIVERSE LOOKS MIGHTY INFINITE TO ME.
Messages 22641 - 22653 of total 22653 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