Like
Haha
Sad
Hug
Wow
Hmmm
Grrr/Dislike
Send SmileNavigation
Neuroscientist Sam Harris on Our Misconceptions About Free Will and How Acknowledging Its ...
TheAstroChuck comments on Oct 31, 2018:
Great book review. I've long thought that our lives are far more deterministic than most science-inclined individuals appreciate. Sacks' book: *The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hatrack* illustrates this point for people with neurological problems. Now Sam Harris writes: The illusoriness of free ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 31, 2018:
If a person is firmly convinced that we are nothing but our bodies, it would make total sense to say that we have no free will. It seems impossible that a skeleton covered in meat would have free will, or for that matter, that it would be consciously aware. How could the firing of neurons contribute anything? My intuitive feeling is that we are not our bodies—that our bodies are just finely made robots.
But we do experience conscious awareness and free will and we experience them continuously. Basically that is all we really do experience. Consciousness is what we are in an ultimate sense. If there were no consciousness there would be no self, and without self there would certainly be no free will. Our everyday perception of reality is an illusion of sorts, and our sense of identity as a body is an illusion IMO, but the one thing that is not an illusion is conscious awareness itself.
If consciousness and free will are illusions, please tell me who or what it is that is being deluded.
TheAstroChuck comments on Oct 31, 2018:
Great book review. I've long thought that our lives are far more deterministic than most science-inclined individuals appreciate. Sacks' book: *The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hatrack* illustrates this point for people with neurological problems. Now Sam Harris writes: The illusoriness of free ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 31, 2018:
If a person is firmly convinced that we are nothing but our bodies, it would make total sense to say that we have no free will. It seems impossible that a skeleton covered in meat would have free will, or for that matter, that it would be consciously aware. How could the firing of neurons contribute anything? My intuitive feeling is that we are not our bodies—that our bodies are just finely made robots.
But we do experience conscious awareness and free will and we experience them continuously. Basically that is all we really do experience. Consciousness is what we are in an ultimate sense. If there were no consciousness there would be no self, and without self there would certainly be no free will. Our everyday perception of reality is an illusion of sorts, and our sense of identity as a body is an illusion IMO, but the one thing that is not an illusion is conscious awareness itself.
If consciousness and free will are illusions, please tell me who or what it is that is being deluded.
Commandants I can live by.....
Matias comments on Oct 31, 2018:
I am always eager to improve my English.
"Every person has the right to control of their body": is this now considered to be good or even standard English usage?
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 31, 2018:
It’s the modern way of trying to be non-sexist. I guess you could say “his or her” but that is clumsy.
You seem to have a remarkable knowledge of English. If English is a second language for you, you must have worked very hard to get where you are in that respect.
What caught my eye about this post was the word “commandant” It’s spell-checking run amuck.
Matias comments on Oct 31, 2018:
I am always eager to improve my English.
"Every person has the right to control of their body": is this now considered to be good or even standard English usage?
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 31, 2018:
It’s the modern way of trying to be non-sexist. I guess you could say “his or her” but that is clumsy.
You seem to have a remarkable knowledge of English. If English is a second language for you, you must have worked very hard to get where you are in that respect.
What caught my eye about this post was the word “commandant” It’s spell-checking run amuck.
Religions vs Cult
gsiamne comments on Oct 30, 2018:
Christianity is a cult of human sacrifice. - Dr Sam Harris
Based on my reading, I think the only difference between a religion and a cult is the size of it's membership.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 30, 2018:
Is there a cult of Sam Harris followers?
gsiamne comments on Oct 30, 2018:
Christianity is a cult of human sacrifice. - Dr Sam Harris
Based on my reading, I think the only difference between a religion and a cult is the size of it's membership.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 30, 2018:
Is there a cult of Sam Harris followers?
Religions vs Cult
genessa comments on Oct 30, 2018:
i am not religionist but i DO make a distinction between religion and cult. a cult has some characteristics share by some religions and not others. one of them, an important one, is the charismatic leader that convinces his (usually his) flock that everyone else in the world is sinning, lying, ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 30, 2018:
Good points.
There are degrees of cultiness.
genessa comments on Oct 30, 2018:
i am not religionist but i DO make a distinction between religion and cult. a cult has some characteristics share by some religions and not others. one of them, an important one, is the charismatic leader that convinces his (usually his) flock that everyone else in the world is sinning, lying, ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 30, 2018:
Good points.
There are degrees of cultiness.
Is death something to be scared of?
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 30, 2018:
http://m.nautil.us/issue/47/consciousness/roger-penrose-on-why-consciousness-does-not-compute
There’s some evidence for the concept of universal consciousness. Perhaps our bodies are just robots with no self awareness and no free will. Under that concept conscious awareness is primary, immortal...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 30, 2018:
@brentan according to some, our sense of self as a separate individual is just an illusion. You can’t lose what you never had. My personal hunch is that there’s nothing worth immortality about an individual set of memories. It’s interesting to think about but I doubt if anyone really knows or understands.
One thing for sure is that conscious awareness will live on through other organisms. It is really Consciousness that we want to survive, and that is immortal by default. Leaves fall from a tree. The tree lives on. A tree falls in the forest. The forest lives on. Our true identity is of a higher order than our body IMO.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 30, 2018:
http://m.nautil.us/issue/47/consciousness/roger-penrose-on-why-consciousness-does-not-compute
There’s some evidence for the concept of universal consciousness. Perhaps our bodies are just robots with no self awareness and no free will. Under that concept conscious awareness is primary, immortal...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 30, 2018:
@brentan according to some, our sense of self as a separate individual is just an illusion. You can’t lose what you never had. My personal hunch is that there’s nothing worth immortality about an individual set of memories. It’s interesting to think about but I doubt if anyone really knows or understands.
One thing for sure is that conscious awareness will live on through other organisms. It is really Consciousness that we want to survive, and that is immortal by default. Leaves fall from a tree. The tree lives on. A tree falls in the forest. The forest lives on. Our true identity is of a higher order than our body IMO.
Alive and Dead
snytiger6 comments on Oct 30, 2018:
LOL.... I would not expect a religious person to be able to grasp the concept. Not that all religious persons are stupid, but they do deliberately limit their scopes of thinking.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 30, 2018:
“Schrödinger stayed in Dublin until retiring in 1955. He had a lifelong interest in the Vedanta philosophy of Hinduism, which influenced his speculations at the close of What Is Life? about the possibility that individual consciousness is only a manifestation of a unitary consciousness pervading the universe.[22]”
(Wikipedia)
While calling himself an atheist, Schrödinger had definite religious leanings. Many of the founders of modern physics were religious in their own ways,
snytiger6 comments on Oct 30, 2018:
LOL.... I would not expect a religious person to be able to grasp the concept. Not that all religious persons are stupid, but they do deliberately limit their scopes of thinking.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 30, 2018:
“Schrödinger stayed in Dublin until retiring in 1955. He had a lifelong interest in the Vedanta philosophy of Hinduism, which influenced his speculations at the close of What Is Life? about the possibility that individual consciousness is only a manifestation of a unitary consciousness pervading the universe.[22]”
(Wikipedia)
While calling himself an atheist, Schrödinger had definite religious leanings. Many of the founders of modern physics were religious in their own ways,
[learning-mind.com] there are many articles on this. Take time to read this and your thoughts?
LucyLoohoo comments on Oct 28, 2018:
And their ''proof'' is verified? I want photos, please, and documentation. None of this "I died and met JEEEEBUS"....
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 29, 2018:
It’s a work in progress. Here’s a very thorough treatment of the subject. There are testable parts to the theory, and so far things are checking out.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1571064513001188
LucyLoohoo comments on Oct 28, 2018:
And their ''proof'' is verified? I want photos, please, and documentation. None of this "I died and met JEEEEBUS"....
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 29, 2018:
It’s a work in progress. Here’s a very thorough treatment of the subject. There are testable parts to the theory, and so far things are checking out.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1571064513001188
How is it that there are still so many people who think global warming is a hoax, or that it is not ...
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 29, 2018:
There are large numbers of professional meteorologists and climatologists who are not in accord with the UN position.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00091.1
While most don’t say it’s a hoax, they don’t view global warming as a dire emergency that requires drastic...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 29, 2018:
@StarvingArtist Okay, I found this 2016 update:
http://blog.ametsoc.org/news/new-survey-shows-ams-members-positions-on-climate-change/
It’s still nowhere near unanimous.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 29, 2018:
There are large numbers of professional meteorologists and climatologists who are not in accord with the UN position.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00091.1
While most don’t say it’s a hoax, they don’t view global warming as a dire emergency that requires drastic...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 29, 2018:
@StarvingArtist Okay, I found this 2016 update:
http://blog.ametsoc.org/news/new-survey-shows-ams-members-positions-on-climate-change/
It’s still nowhere near unanimous.
Some Thoughts About The Reality Of Space
Premise: Space is NOT a thing.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 27, 2018:
The concept of a thing is sort of nebulous. Maybe there are no things.
According to quantum gravity theory, space is granular rather than a smooth expanse. Space does not extend to infinity either. There are a finite number of the space “particles”.
According to the same theory time does ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 29, 2018:
@johnprytz Actually “Reality is not What it Seems” is the title of Rovelli’s book about quantum gravity. In the book some of your questions might be addressed. It’s partly about theories not fully accepted yet but that look promising.
I’ll check into David Chalmer’s ideas. Thanks.
Here’s what I’m learning about right now, and it’s intriguing, but be prepared to read about souls. But it’s about the work of Penrose, not woo.
http://m.nautil.us/issue/47/consciousness/roger-penrose-on-why-consciousness-does-not-compute
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 27, 2018:
The concept of a thing is sort of nebulous. Maybe there are no things.
According to quantum gravity theory, space is granular rather than a smooth expanse. Space does not extend to infinity either. There are a finite number of the space “particles”.
According to the same theory time does ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 29, 2018:
@johnprytz Actually “Reality is not What it Seems” is the title of Rovelli’s book about quantum gravity. In the book some of your questions might be addressed. It’s partly about theories not fully accepted yet but that look promising.
I’ll check into David Chalmer’s ideas. Thanks.
Here’s what I’m learning about right now, and it’s intriguing, but be prepared to read about souls. But it’s about the work of Penrose, not woo.
http://m.nautil.us/issue/47/consciousness/roger-penrose-on-why-consciousness-does-not-compute
Can an adverb modify a noun?
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 28, 2018:
Maybe in that particular case “yesterday” is an adjective.
In “build high”, “high” serves as an adverb, modifying “build”, but in “high building” it is an adjective.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 28, 2018:
@Noyi
https://www.google.com/search?q=can+a+word+be+both+an+adjective+and+an+adverb&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us=safari
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 28, 2018:
Maybe in that particular case “yesterday” is an adjective.
In “build high”, “high” serves as an adverb, modifying “build”, but in “high building” it is an adjective.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 28, 2018:
@Noyi
https://www.google.com/search?q=can+a+word+be+both+an+adjective+and+an+adverb&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us=safari
Some Thoughts About The Reality Of Space
Premise: Space is NOT a thing.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 27, 2018:
The concept of a thing is sort of nebulous. Maybe there are no things.
According to quantum gravity theory, space is granular rather than a smooth expanse. Space does not extend to infinity either. There are a finite number of the space “particles”.
According to the same theory time does ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 28, 2018:
@johnprytz You ask such hard questions!
“Reality is not What it Seems” Carlo Rovelli
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 27, 2018:
The concept of a thing is sort of nebulous. Maybe there are no things.
According to quantum gravity theory, space is granular rather than a smooth expanse. Space does not extend to infinity either. There are a finite number of the space “particles”.
According to the same theory time does ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 28, 2018:
@johnprytz You ask such hard questions!
“Reality is not What it Seems” Carlo Rovelli
Do you celebrate Christmas as a family social gathering without God?
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 27, 2018:
No, it’s Yule.
Call it Yule please.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 27, 2018:
@LenHazell53 I was indisposed. :-)
Thank you.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 27, 2018:
No, it’s Yule.
Call it Yule please.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 27, 2018:
@LenHazell53 I was indisposed. :-)
Thank you.
Do you celebrate Christmas as a family social gathering without God?
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 27, 2018:
No, it’s Yule.
Call it Yule please.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 27, 2018:
@brentan I think so. The Swedes have it “Yul”
I think it refers to the winter months in Old English.
I know it was a Germanic holiday long before Christianity came onto the scene. Lighting of the Yule log, candles, gifts, greenery, tree, feasting and drinking—all are old Germanic customs.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 27, 2018:
No, it’s Yule.
Call it Yule please.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 27, 2018:
@brentan I think so. The Swedes have it “Yul”
I think it refers to the winter months in Old English.
I know it was a Germanic holiday long before Christianity came onto the scene. Lighting of the Yule log, candles, gifts, greenery, tree, feasting and drinking—all are old Germanic customs.
Why Are Americans Still Uncomfortable with Atheism?
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 26, 2018:
It’s a good article, but one thing caught my eye that I question:
“...Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, who fought to keep God out of the document. But, while neither was a creedal Christian, both men were monotheists, and, like John Locke, their ideas about tolerance generally extended ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 27, 2018:
@Umbral Not really. A few sleazy politicians use religion to garner votes but no religious group is trying to take control. They’d get nowhere.
Having prayer breakfasts and so forth is a long way from establishing a state religion.
Political hype.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 26, 2018:
It’s a good article, but one thing caught my eye that I question:
“...Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, who fought to keep God out of the document. But, while neither was a creedal Christian, both men were monotheists, and, like John Locke, their ideas about tolerance generally extended ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 27, 2018:
@Umbral Not really. A few sleazy politicians use religion to garner votes but no religious group is trying to take control. They’d get nowhere.
Having prayer breakfasts and so forth is a long way from establishing a state religion.
Political hype.
What is the true purpose of religion?
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 26, 2018:
Just about any organization attracts people who, for some reason, want to be in charge. It’s a big ego-boost I suppose, and it can be irritating. Yet those controlling people are useful. They exist for reasons. Some of them learn to moderate their egos and develop into true leaders.
It’s not...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 27, 2018:
@SimonCyrene There are different kinds of religions though. Some of them demand little. If a person chooses to belong to a religious group we can only assume that they have decided that whatever is demanded is outweighed by benefits. It’s the same with any group, religious or otherwise.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 26, 2018:
Just about any organization attracts people who, for some reason, want to be in charge. It’s a big ego-boost I suppose, and it can be irritating. Yet those controlling people are useful. They exist for reasons. Some of them learn to moderate their egos and develop into true leaders.
It’s not...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 27, 2018:
@SimonCyrene There are different kinds of religions though. Some of them demand little. If a person chooses to belong to a religious group we can only assume that they have decided that whatever is demanded is outweighed by benefits. It’s the same with any group, religious or otherwise.
What is the true purpose of religion?
HippieChick58 comments on Oct 26, 2018:
Seriously, the true purpose of religion is to control the population.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 26, 2018:
@HippieChick58 what about religious groups run mainly by women? How do they fit into your argument?
HippieChick58 comments on Oct 26, 2018:
Seriously, the true purpose of religion is to control the population.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 26, 2018:
@HippieChick58 what about religious groups run mainly by women? How do they fit into your argument?
"It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material ...
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 26, 2018:
Matter is like God. One mystery is substituted for another. What is matter? According to some it is an interaction between covariant quantum fields. Great, what the hell is a field? Not a “thing” for sure.
Maybe Donald Hoffman is on to something with his conscious realism.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 26, 2018:
@rcandlish I would absolutely not like to see any kind of dictatorship, especially not a theistic one.
I think the concept of fields was developed as a tool, and exists only in the abstract. I’m not really qualified to say for sure. There seems to be a variety of opinions. From my perspective we humans are abysmally ignorant about ultimate reality, and science, valuable as it is, gives only superficial explanations.
Seems to me there’s some confusion about what it means to exist. All our experiences are framed by conscious awareness and no one seems to know what that is, so by corollary we don’t know who or what we ourselves are.
I’m bewildered but it is a pleasant bewilderment because of the staggering implications.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 26, 2018:
Matter is like God. One mystery is substituted for another. What is matter? According to some it is an interaction between covariant quantum fields. Great, what the hell is a field? Not a “thing” for sure.
Maybe Donald Hoffman is on to something with his conscious realism.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 26, 2018:
@rcandlish I would absolutely not like to see any kind of dictatorship, especially not a theistic one.
I think the concept of fields was developed as a tool, and exists only in the abstract. I’m not really qualified to say for sure. There seems to be a variety of opinions. From my perspective we humans are abysmally ignorant about ultimate reality, and science, valuable as it is, gives only superficial explanations.
Seems to me there’s some confusion about what it means to exist. All our experiences are framed by conscious awareness and no one seems to know what that is, so by corollary we don’t know who or what we ourselves are.
I’m bewildered but it is a pleasant bewilderment because of the staggering implications.
Science can only provide facts (and there no other way to get reliable facts about our world).
Dietl comments on Oct 26, 2018:
The problem that keeps coming up in your posts such as this one is the following sentence: "You can't find meaning in science." Many people, including myself, will point out that of course you can find meaning in science. The problem is the word 'find' here. I don't think you use it in the usual ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 26, 2018:
@TheAstroChuck What about my interest in Universal Consciousness? Isn’t that metaphysics? It is something that has been espoused by very high-level physicists and conceivably could be scientifically verified. Should I not think about Universal Consciousness? I know it is not science yet, and I do not mix it up with science. What is the penalty if I talk about it? May I just think about it?
That is a very long and interesting interchange of May third. If physics defines sound as a pressure wave, then clearly the falling tree makes sound even if the frequency or volume is such that it can’t be heard. It’s just semantics, but for everyday usage, a sound is a qualia that I create in my brain when my auditory nerves are stimulated by the pressure wave. Under that usage without an observer there can be no sound.
If we are doing physics we stick to the definition established by physicists. If we are studying psychology perhaps a different definition is needed. The point is that philosophy is needed to sort out and clarify the dilemma.
My two cents.
Dietl comments on Oct 26, 2018:
The problem that keeps coming up in your posts such as this one is the following sentence: "You can't find meaning in science." Many people, including myself, will point out that of course you can find meaning in science. The problem is the word 'find' here. I don't think you use it in the usual ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 26, 2018:
@TheAstroChuck What about my interest in Universal Consciousness? Isn’t that metaphysics? It is something that has been espoused by very high-level physicists and conceivably could be scientifically verified. Should I not think about Universal Consciousness? I know it is not science yet, and I do not mix it up with science. What is the penalty if I talk about it? May I just think about it?
That is a very long and interesting interchange of May third. If physics defines sound as a pressure wave, then clearly the falling tree makes sound even if the frequency or volume is such that it can’t be heard. It’s just semantics, but for everyday usage, a sound is a qualia that I create in my brain when my auditory nerves are stimulated by the pressure wave. Under that usage without an observer there can be no sound.
If we are doing physics we stick to the definition established by physicists. If we are studying psychology perhaps a different definition is needed. The point is that philosophy is needed to sort out and clarify the dilemma.
My two cents.
Science can only provide facts (and there no other way to get reliable facts about our world).
skado comments on Oct 26, 2018:
"Religion or ideology has no place in science itself, but it can be tolerated alongside science."
Tolerate? Really? How about Art? Should Art be tolerated? What about Golfing or Bowling? Or Love? Must Science *tolerate* Love? If science is not to become just another ideology, it must ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 26, 2018:
Skado, if I could give you a hundred upvotes for this reply, I would.
skado comments on Oct 26, 2018:
"Religion or ideology has no place in science itself, but it can be tolerated alongside science."
Tolerate? Really? How about Art? Should Art be tolerated? What about Golfing or Bowling? Or Love? Must Science *tolerate* Love? If science is not to become just another ideology, it must ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 26, 2018:
Skado, if I could give you a hundred upvotes for this reply, I would.
Science can only provide facts (and there no other way to get reliable facts about our world).
skado comments on Oct 26, 2018:
I don't think the pursuit of meaning is the primary motivation behind "imagined orders". The clue is in the word "order" itself. Fictitious orders are simply useful organizational schemes, of which science is a prime example. The product of science is every bit as fictional as any political or ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 26, 2018:
Very well said sir, and I agree.
The map is not the territory, that’s for sure!
skado comments on Oct 26, 2018:
I don't think the pursuit of meaning is the primary motivation behind "imagined orders". The clue is in the word "order" itself. Fictitious orders are simply useful organizational schemes, of which science is a prime example. The product of science is every bit as fictional as any political or ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 26, 2018:
Very well said sir, and I agree.
The map is not the territory, that’s for sure!
Science can only provide facts (and there no other way to get reliable facts about our world).
Dietl comments on Oct 26, 2018:
The problem that keeps coming up in your posts such as this one is the following sentence: "You can't find meaning in science." Many people, including myself, will point out that of course you can find meaning in science. The problem is the word 'find' here. I don't think you use it in the usual ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 26, 2018:
@TheAstroChuck
First of all, I don’t do drugs, not even prescription drugs if I can help it. Many years ago I smoked a few joints but I didn’t inhale except for the one time. :-)
I’m trying to digest your objection to metaphysics. Don’t all scientific discoveries start out as just unproven ideas? (Beyond physics) If by “doing metaphysics” you mean proclaiming intuitive ideas to be true without verification, then I agree. What about just pondering the unknown? Do you object to that?
James Clerk Maxwell:
“It has been asserted that metaphysical speculation is a thing of the past, and that physical science has extirpated it. The discussion of the categories of existence, however, does not appear to be in danger of coming to an end in our time, and the exercise of speculation continues as fascinating to every fresh mind as it was in the days of Thales.”
Dietl comments on Oct 26, 2018:
The problem that keeps coming up in your posts such as this one is the following sentence: "You can't find meaning in science." Many people, including myself, will point out that of course you can find meaning in science. The problem is the word 'find' here. I don't think you use it in the usual ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 26, 2018:
@TheAstroChuck
First of all, I don’t do drugs, not even prescription drugs if I can help it. Many years ago I smoked a few joints but I didn’t inhale except for the one time. :-)
I’m trying to digest your objection to metaphysics. Don’t all scientific discoveries start out as just unproven ideas? (Beyond physics) If by “doing metaphysics” you mean proclaiming intuitive ideas to be true without verification, then I agree. What about just pondering the unknown? Do you object to that?
James Clerk Maxwell:
“It has been asserted that metaphysical speculation is a thing of the past, and that physical science has extirpated it. The discussion of the categories of existence, however, does not appear to be in danger of coming to an end in our time, and the exercise of speculation continues as fascinating to every fresh mind as it was in the days of Thales.”
An interesting observation
Matias comments on Oct 26, 2018:
Well... who is "you"? Am "I" just meat plus skeleton?
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 26, 2018:
You are the ghost. You are just driving a meat covered skeleton.
So what the heck is a ghost? Big mystery.
Matias comments on Oct 26, 2018:
Well... who is "you"? Am "I" just meat plus skeleton?
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 26, 2018:
You are the ghost. You are just driving a meat covered skeleton.
So what the heck is a ghost? Big mystery.
Science can only provide facts (and there no other way to get reliable facts about our world).
Dietl comments on Oct 26, 2018:
The problem that keeps coming up in your posts such as this one is the following sentence: "You can't find meaning in science." Many people, including myself, will point out that of course you can find meaning in science. The problem is the word 'find' here. I don't think you use it in the usual ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 26, 2018:
But Matias qualified that word “find” by saying “or to be precise, in scientific statements.” A scientific statement alone is usually not of much value in my life. So the Higgs particle was found to exit. What am I going to do with that information if I don’t have an advanced degree in physics?
We can go beyond the objective realm of science. We can engage in the subjective world of metaphysics, mysticism, art, etc. and find a mountain of meaning.
Dietl comments on Oct 26, 2018:
The problem that keeps coming up in your posts such as this one is the following sentence: "You can't find meaning in science." Many people, including myself, will point out that of course you can find meaning in science. The problem is the word 'find' here. I don't think you use it in the usual ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 26, 2018:
But Matias qualified that word “find” by saying “or to be precise, in scientific statements.” A scientific statement alone is usually not of much value in my life. So the Higgs particle was found to exit. What am I going to do with that information if I don’t have an advanced degree in physics?
We can go beyond the objective realm of science. We can engage in the subjective world of metaphysics, mysticism, art, etc. and find a mountain of meaning.
I believe it's a good practice to base one's worldview, to the extent humanly possible, only on ...
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 22, 2018:
My world view consists of abject bewilderment. That’s because as I see it, science provides only superficial answers.
Maybe we need two world views: one based on science, that helps us survive in our daily physical existence, and another based on a keen sense of awe and wonder, where new ideas ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 24, 2018:
@skado I can see that for maximum efficiency and social harmony we should think only about statements and concepts that have been vetted by science.i see however at least a couple of drawbacks to that idea.
Science has to start somewhere. If NO ONE ever thought about unorthodox things, things not proven by the scientific method, then science would never advance. Intuitive ideas spring up somehow from the subconscious mind and they just might bear valuable fruit if nourished. Of course one shouldn’t believe those intuitive ideas 100% until they have been verified. On the other hand I think it permissible for my world view to have a variety of concepts, each with its own level of confidence. When communicating those concepts to others it is important to say the level of confidence that you have, and why you have that level.
I don’t know if anything is known with absolute certainty except for simple identities, and those things are superficial, having to do with semantics or definitions. My world view should absolutely contain the body of scientific knowledge, but that knowledge is in no way a clear-cut unit. A lot of so-called scientific studies are little more than an attempt by someone to snag grant money, or it is someone’s way of getting tenure. Individuals have to evaluate and use discrimination before accepting those studies 100%. So there’ll always be individual and social inconsistencies and conflict.
We might agree that objective reality as defined by science is sort of true and is good enough to be used for common reference, but IMO that objective reality is known only superficially. Maybe for practical purposes that’s good enough, but some of us crave something more. We feel a deep sense of awe and wonder—we want to be engulfed—to subjectively experience a bit of ultimate reality.
That kind of awareness lends the keenest of motivation to survive and live well. It’s always been the tribes and societies with a religious impulse that survived and prevailed.The societies with the highest level of metaphysical awareness should also have the highest level of love and compassion, and that alone gives them an advantage.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 22, 2018:
My world view consists of abject bewilderment. That’s because as I see it, science provides only superficial answers.
Maybe we need two world views: one based on science, that helps us survive in our daily physical existence, and another based on a keen sense of awe and wonder, where new ideas ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 24, 2018:
@skado I can see that for maximum efficiency and social harmony we should think only about statements and concepts that have been vetted by science.i see however at least a couple of drawbacks to that idea.
Science has to start somewhere. If NO ONE ever thought about unorthodox things, things not proven by the scientific method, then science would never advance. Intuitive ideas spring up somehow from the subconscious mind and they just might bear valuable fruit if nourished. Of course one shouldn’t believe those intuitive ideas 100% until they have been verified. On the other hand I think it permissible for my world view to have a variety of concepts, each with its own level of confidence. When communicating those concepts to others it is important to say the level of confidence that you have, and why you have that level.
I don’t know if anything is known with absolute certainty except for simple identities, and those things are superficial, having to do with semantics or definitions. My world view should absolutely contain the body of scientific knowledge, but that knowledge is in no way a clear-cut unit. A lot of so-called scientific studies are little more than an attempt by someone to snag grant money, or it is someone’s way of getting tenure. Individuals have to evaluate and use discrimination before accepting those studies 100%. So there’ll always be individual and social inconsistencies and conflict.
We might agree that objective reality as defined by science is sort of true and is good enough to be used for common reference, but IMO that objective reality is known only superficially. Maybe for practical purposes that’s good enough, but some of us crave something more. We feel a deep sense of awe and wonder—we want to be engulfed—to subjectively experience a bit of ultimate reality.
That kind of awareness lends the keenest of motivation to survive and live well. It’s always been the tribes and societies with a religious impulse that survived and prevailed.The societies with the highest level of metaphysical awareness should also have the highest level of love and compassion, and that alone gives them an advantage.
A concept of a god.
hrichardson8 comments on Oct 23, 2018:
"Either a god exists or it doesn't. If it does, then either it manifests itself in reality in some perceivable way or it doesn't. And if it doesn't, then that god is indistinguishable from a god that does not exist."
~ Matt Dillahunty, host on *Atheist Experience* for the Atheist Community of ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 23, 2018:
@hrichardson8 I won’t start a war if you agree not to. :-)
hrichardson8 comments on Oct 23, 2018:
"Either a god exists or it doesn't. If it does, then either it manifests itself in reality in some perceivable way or it doesn't. And if it doesn't, then that god is indistinguishable from a god that does not exist."
~ Matt Dillahunty, host on *Atheist Experience* for the Atheist Community of ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 23, 2018:
@hrichardson8 I won’t start a war if you agree not to. :-)
A concept of a god.
hrichardson8 comments on Oct 23, 2018:
"Either a god exists or it doesn't. If it does, then either it manifests itself in reality in some perceivable way or it doesn't. And if it doesn't, then that god is indistinguishable from a god that does not exist."
~ Matt Dillahunty, host on *Atheist Experience* for the Atheist Community of ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 23, 2018:
@hrichardson8 True, if you just said “God is great” it would not mean much. But look at what Einstein said. Look at what factorbelief said. They are conveying deeply felt subjective experiences of intense awareness, awe, and appreciation.
I for one will not quibble over their choice of words.
hrichardson8 comments on Oct 23, 2018:
"Either a god exists or it doesn't. If it does, then either it manifests itself in reality in some perceivable way or it doesn't. And if it doesn't, then that god is indistinguishable from a god that does not exist."
~ Matt Dillahunty, host on *Atheist Experience* for the Atheist Community of ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 23, 2018:
@hrichardson8 True, if you just said “God is great” it would not mean much. But look at what Einstein said. Look at what factorbelief said. They are conveying deeply felt subjective experiences of intense awareness, awe, and appreciation.
I for one will not quibble over their choice of words.
A concept of a god.
dare2dream comments on Oct 23, 2018:
If a god exists as you described and does not intervene when prayed to, what would it matter to us if he exists or not?
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 23, 2018:
The thought of Ultimate Reality raises my spirits and brings joy. It’s not about getting favors. It’s subjective feelings of awe, appreciation and gratitude.
dare2dream comments on Oct 23, 2018:
If a god exists as you described and does not intervene when prayed to, what would it matter to us if he exists or not?
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 23, 2018:
The thought of Ultimate Reality raises my spirits and brings joy. It’s not about getting favors. It’s subjective feelings of awe, appreciation and gratitude.
A concept of a god.
hrichardson8 comments on Oct 23, 2018:
"Either a god exists or it doesn't. If it does, then either it manifests itself in reality in some perceivable way or it doesn't. And if it doesn't, then that god is indistinguishable from a god that does not exist."
~ Matt Dillahunty, host on *Atheist Experience* for the Atheist Community of ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 23, 2018:
@hrichardson8 Yes, but “nature” is a trite, worn out word that has been devalued to mean almost nothing IMO. Einstein could have said, “ I like nature. Nature is good”, but that has no impact. Instead he said:
“My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind."
Most of us think of a human being as a wonderous, valuable entity, difficult to fully understand. But we are all just a part of nature. That means that nature herself is extremely awesome and wonderous and deserves to be described in the most glorious terms.
hrichardson8 comments on Oct 23, 2018:
"Either a god exists or it doesn't. If it does, then either it manifests itself in reality in some perceivable way or it doesn't. And if it doesn't, then that god is indistinguishable from a god that does not exist."
~ Matt Dillahunty, host on *Atheist Experience* for the Atheist Community of ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 23, 2018:
@hrichardson8 Yes, but “nature” is a trite, worn out word that has been devalued to mean almost nothing IMO. Einstein could have said, “ I like nature. Nature is good”, but that has no impact. Instead he said:
“My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind."
Most of us think of a human being as a wonderous, valuable entity, difficult to fully understand. But we are all just a part of nature. That means that nature herself is extremely awesome and wonderous and deserves to be described in the most glorious terms.
A concept of a god.
hrichardson8 comments on Oct 23, 2018:
"Either a god exists or it doesn't. If it does, then either it manifests itself in reality in some perceivable way or it doesn't. And if it doesn't, then that god is indistinguishable from a god that does not exist."
~ Matt Dillahunty, host on *Atheist Experience* for the Atheist Community of ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 23, 2018:
No faith is required. It’s a subjective experience for some, not a “thing” out there to be dissected and proven.
hrichardson8 comments on Oct 23, 2018:
"Either a god exists or it doesn't. If it does, then either it manifests itself in reality in some perceivable way or it doesn't. And if it doesn't, then that god is indistinguishable from a god that does not exist."
~ Matt Dillahunty, host on *Atheist Experience* for the Atheist Community of ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 23, 2018:
No faith is required. It’s a subjective experience for some, not a “thing” out there to be dissected and proven.
So if we reject the idea that a transcendental force has predetermined what should be the human ...
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 23, 2018:
The human condition is fine with me. Transcendent or not, we are subject to the workings of nature. Things are the way they have to be IMO, and it is neither good nor bad.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 23, 2018:
@hwgoldson Actually I don’t believe in much of anything except maybe optimism. I don’t think things are predestined but we do have to work within the laws of nature, including society, etc. But within that framework we have choices. Our bodily instincts, learning, reasoning power, etc. keep us on track and alive most of the time. Lots of the things that affect us are pure chance. All that is handled by the subconscious.
I personally lean toward the concept of universal consciousness: if things start to go sour consciousness leaps in and coaxes the body in a new course of action. In that theory our bodies have no conscious awareness or free will. Our true Self is shared by all.
When I said that things are the way they have to be, I meant the human condition in general. For example, war is an integral part of the human experience. That kind of competition is very important in the evolutionary process. All the things that people think are heavenly or terrible are just part of the natural environment—neither good nor bad IMO.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 23, 2018:
The human condition is fine with me. Transcendent or not, we are subject to the workings of nature. Things are the way they have to be IMO, and it is neither good nor bad.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 23, 2018:
@hwgoldson Actually I don’t believe in much of anything except maybe optimism. I don’t think things are predestined but we do have to work within the laws of nature, including society, etc. But within that framework we have choices. Our bodily instincts, learning, reasoning power, etc. keep us on track and alive most of the time. Lots of the things that affect us are pure chance. All that is handled by the subconscious.
I personally lean toward the concept of universal consciousness: if things start to go sour consciousness leaps in and coaxes the body in a new course of action. In that theory our bodies have no conscious awareness or free will. Our true Self is shared by all.
When I said that things are the way they have to be, I meant the human condition in general. For example, war is an integral part of the human experience. That kind of competition is very important in the evolutionary process. All the things that people think are heavenly or terrible are just part of the natural environment—neither good nor bad IMO.
The Corny Bible
Can anyone help me out here with a rational explanation?
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 23, 2018:
Wheat has ears too:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ear_(botany)
In Britain “corn” I’m told refers to any grain.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 23, 2018:
@Uncorrugated Here’s some Indian Corn I grew. It’s “Indian” because it is derived from original native corn.
To us “corn on the cob” is just a way of serving any kind of whole ears of green corn. We pick it up and bite it right off the cob. Gets messy.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 23, 2018:
Wheat has ears too:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ear_(botany)
In Britain “corn” I’m told refers to any grain.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 23, 2018:
@Uncorrugated Here’s some Indian Corn I grew. It’s “Indian” because it is derived from original native corn.
To us “corn on the cob” is just a way of serving any kind of whole ears of green corn. We pick it up and bite it right off the cob. Gets messy.
[foxnews.
genessa comments on Oct 23, 2018:
humor me please -- i won't give fox the click. can you summarize or copy and paste for me (and any others who don't want to click through to faux news)? thanks!
g
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 23, 2018:
Religion good.
Atheism bad—very very bad!
genessa comments on Oct 23, 2018:
humor me please -- i won't give fox the click. can you summarize or copy and paste for me (and any others who don't want to click through to faux news)? thanks!
g
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 23, 2018:
Religion good.
Atheism bad—very very bad!
I believe it's a good practice to base one's worldview, to the extent humanly possible, only on ...
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 22, 2018:
My world view consists of abject bewilderment. That’s because as I see it, science provides only superficial answers.
Maybe we need two world views: one based on science, that helps us survive in our daily physical existence, and another based on a keen sense of awe and wonder, where new ideas ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 22, 2018:
@skado I think “world view” has come to mean a personal philosophy about what we believe is true about nature. I suppose a person’s religious or metaphysical opinions should not be considered part of their world view in that those opinions are based on intuition and might just be speculation.I agree that those opinions ought not be presented as facts about nature.
A religious person probably wouldn’t talk much about his world view. It’d be his heavenly view or something like that.
I’ve about decided there’s never going to be an in-depth explanation of the objective world. Explanations are subjective stuff. To truly make sense out of reality we need to find out what we ourselves are, and we need to understand deep conscious awareness. Studying the brain is not going to give in-depth answers IMO.
Do you think it’s possible for us humans to have an in-depth understanding of reality?
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 22, 2018:
My world view consists of abject bewilderment. That’s because as I see it, science provides only superficial answers.
Maybe we need two world views: one based on science, that helps us survive in our daily physical existence, and another based on a keen sense of awe and wonder, where new ideas ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 22, 2018:
@skado I think “world view” has come to mean a personal philosophy about what we believe is true about nature. I suppose a person’s religious or metaphysical opinions should not be considered part of their world view in that those opinions are based on intuition and might just be speculation.I agree that those opinions ought not be presented as facts about nature.
A religious person probably wouldn’t talk much about his world view. It’d be his heavenly view or something like that.
I’ve about decided there’s never going to be an in-depth explanation of the objective world. Explanations are subjective stuff. To truly make sense out of reality we need to find out what we ourselves are, and we need to understand deep conscious awareness. Studying the brain is not going to give in-depth answers IMO.
Do you think it’s possible for us humans to have an in-depth understanding of reality?
I've finally given some responses to the people who responded to my not thought out post about ...
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 19, 2018:
Don’t sweat it. Some of ‘em ARE lazy and/or stupid. On the other hand, some people just like the freedom of sleeping outdoors. After all, it is cheaper.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 21, 2018:
@CommonHuman In that you have researched the problem and have such intimate involvement, I’m sure that you know more about it than I do. My opinions are based on my limited experience—what I’ve observed and learned from talking with people who live outside.
The avenues I was thinking of were not government type bail-out programs. Right now in my area there are multitudes of people who have lost their houses. They are scrambling around, living in tents or refuge centers, eating at soup kitchens, etc. Most of them will improve their lots day by day, and eventually regain a reasonable standard of living. There is a lot of community involvement, but the biggest thing in their favor is that most of them are buoyed by positive attitudes. They can see their way out.
I try to promote optimism whenever I can. It sort of irks me when people make hopeless, pessimistic appraisals of life situations—display victim mentalities and blame wealthy people or society at large or “capitalism”.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 19, 2018:
Don’t sweat it. Some of ‘em ARE lazy and/or stupid. On the other hand, some people just like the freedom of sleeping outdoors. After all, it is cheaper.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 21, 2018:
@CommonHuman In that you have researched the problem and have such intimate involvement, I’m sure that you know more about it than I do. My opinions are based on my limited experience—what I’ve observed and learned from talking with people who live outside.
The avenues I was thinking of were not government type bail-out programs. Right now in my area there are multitudes of people who have lost their houses. They are scrambling around, living in tents or refuge centers, eating at soup kitchens, etc. Most of them will improve their lots day by day, and eventually regain a reasonable standard of living. There is a lot of community involvement, but the biggest thing in their favor is that most of them are buoyed by positive attitudes. They can see their way out.
I try to promote optimism whenever I can. It sort of irks me when people make hopeless, pessimistic appraisals of life situations—display victim mentalities and blame wealthy people or society at large or “capitalism”.
Our Latest Global Warming Scare
by Richard A. Epstein
[hoover.org]
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 18, 2018:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_temperature
Average annual temperature of NYC is 55.3 degrees Fahrenheit
Average annual temperature of Boston is 51.7 degrees Fahrenheit
NYC, which is about 200 miles from Boston is 3.6 degrees warmer than Boston on average.
According ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 21, 2018:
@Veteran229 Good Point. It might be more meaningful to look at the average temperatures of entire states. That’ll be my next project.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 18, 2018:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_temperature
Average annual temperature of NYC is 55.3 degrees Fahrenheit
Average annual temperature of Boston is 51.7 degrees Fahrenheit
NYC, which is about 200 miles from Boston is 3.6 degrees warmer than Boston on average.
According ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 21, 2018:
@Veteran229 Good Point. It might be more meaningful to look at the average temperatures of entire states. That’ll be my next project.
The Ongoing Enigma of the Crop Circles: Part One
One, just one, of numerous bits of suggestive ...
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 20, 2018:
Those damned aliens ought to be made to pay for the damage they do.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 21, 2018:
@johnprytz Do the jokers even have their green cards?
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 20, 2018:
Those damned aliens ought to be made to pay for the damage they do.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 21, 2018:
@johnprytz Do the jokers even have their green cards?
Religious conservatives lead the nation in online porn searches.
NoMagicCookie comments on Oct 20, 2018:
The religious states also have the highest teen-pregnancy rates. Abstinence only really works for theists.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 20, 2018:
Which are the religious states?
How do you know it is the religious teens who are getting pregnant?
NoMagicCookie comments on Oct 20, 2018:
The religious states also have the highest teen-pregnancy rates. Abstinence only really works for theists.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 20, 2018:
Which are the religious states?
How do you know it is the religious teens who are getting pregnant?
One Man Could End World Hunger, but He Won’t
[truthdig.com]
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 13, 2018:
Baloney! If all of Jeff Bezos’s assets were evenly divided each person would receive five bucks, enough for a hamburger with fries. The thinking in this article is based on envy, and ignores some basic facts of economics. Paper wealth is not wealth. Real wealth consists of goods and services, and ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 20, 2018:
@jondspen I agree that social conditions have changed and that in some ways we are worse off. Society has been affected by new technologies that have weakened the family unit. Also there are masses of people now, and yes, a lot of people seem unhappy.
On the other hand, a lot of people are thriving and happy. They are the ones with optimistic outlooks who think true and positive thoughts. There are ways of spicing up your life. If a person can’t learn to like their job they can switch to something else. They can engage in sports and hobbies, read, travel, etc. etc. If consumer goods are a millstone they can get rid of those things. Get rid of the TV. Steps can be taken.
I think we romanticize the old days too much. Life was meaningful then for most people, and it can be meaningful today for us.
Every moment of conscious awareness is a precious gift to be savored in wonder and awe.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 13, 2018:
Baloney! If all of Jeff Bezos’s assets were evenly divided each person would receive five bucks, enough for a hamburger with fries. The thinking in this article is based on envy, and ignores some basic facts of economics. Paper wealth is not wealth. Real wealth consists of goods and services, and ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 20, 2018:
@jondspen I agree that social conditions have changed and that in some ways we are worse off. Society has been affected by new technologies that have weakened the family unit. Also there are masses of people now, and yes, a lot of people seem unhappy.
On the other hand, a lot of people are thriving and happy. They are the ones with optimistic outlooks who think true and positive thoughts. There are ways of spicing up your life. If a person can’t learn to like their job they can switch to something else. They can engage in sports and hobbies, read, travel, etc. etc. If consumer goods are a millstone they can get rid of those things. Get rid of the TV. Steps can be taken.
I think we romanticize the old days too much. Life was meaningful then for most people, and it can be meaningful today for us.
Every moment of conscious awareness is a precious gift to be savored in wonder and awe.
The Ongoing Enigma of the Crop Circles: Part One
One, just one, of numerous bits of suggestive ...
DenoPenno comments on Oct 20, 2018:
Crop circles are produced by extraterrestrial teens banished from their own planet for producing these things everywhere. It was the graffiti of the day and the practice got out of hand.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 20, 2018:
Do they have their green cards?
DenoPenno comments on Oct 20, 2018:
Crop circles are produced by extraterrestrial teens banished from their own planet for producing these things everywhere. It was the graffiti of the day and the practice got out of hand.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 20, 2018:
Do they have their green cards?
Socially Responsible Investing
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 19, 2018:
I’m okay with guns and gold but don’t like candy and soft drinks. Trouble is that my fund is managed at different layers and I have no input, or if I do I am not aware of it.
If a corporation’s stock gets pushed down in value does that really hurt them or deter them? The remaining ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 20, 2018:
@JackPedigo That working in mercury bare legged is a legitimate concern and if it is happening the practice should be stopped. Did you listen to the podcast “S-Town”?
$15/hr. Is a fair wage in our economy. But go to a country where the normal wage is one US dollar per day and pay $15/hr. And you’ll create massive inflation and instant havoc. The average person who was previously getting by in the local economy will suddenly be shut out.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 19, 2018:
I’m okay with guns and gold but don’t like candy and soft drinks. Trouble is that my fund is managed at different layers and I have no input, or if I do I am not aware of it.
If a corporation’s stock gets pushed down in value does that really hurt them or deter them? The remaining ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 20, 2018:
@JackPedigo That working in mercury bare legged is a legitimate concern and if it is happening the practice should be stopped. Did you listen to the podcast “S-Town”?
$15/hr. Is a fair wage in our economy. But go to a country where the normal wage is one US dollar per day and pay $15/hr. And you’ll create massive inflation and instant havoc. The average person who was previously getting by in the local economy will suddenly be shut out.
The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion
As secularism grows, atheists and agnostics are ...
jlynn37 comments on Oct 20, 2018:
When someone states that they are "none" or "no religion", doesn't mean that they do not believe in god. It is saying that they have no religious affiliation. They most likely are NOT a-theist or agnostic but are theist. Just my opinion.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 20, 2018:
Perfect! I was going to say the same thing but you said it better.
jlynn37 comments on Oct 20, 2018:
When someone states that they are "none" or "no religion", doesn't mean that they do not believe in god. It is saying that they have no religious affiliation. They most likely are NOT a-theist or agnostic but are theist. Just my opinion.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 20, 2018:
Perfect! I was going to say the same thing but you said it better.
SHOULD WE RESPECT RELIGION?
[barbara.smoker.freeuk.com]
Pralina1 comments on Oct 20, 2018:
Blah blah blah blah , " muslims are really sensitive and hurt when their religion is joked about "..
1) I give a rats behind about muslims
2) when they become sensitive about women s rights and freedom , and when the stop giving 10 yr old girls as brides to 60 yr old f !$& , well , to anyone ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 20, 2018:
I once had some Muslim neighbors who were ethnic Albanians and they were absolutely great people and good neighbors in every way.
Some of those things that so grate on our sensibilities come from the harsh desert code of the Middle East and were social mores before the time of Mohamed. Those same social mores are seen in the Bible.
Not all Muslims are the same, but as for me, I will respect all of them.
Pralina1 comments on Oct 20, 2018:
Blah blah blah blah , " muslims are really sensitive and hurt when their religion is joked about "..
1) I give a rats behind about muslims
2) when they become sensitive about women s rights and freedom , and when the stop giving 10 yr old girls as brides to 60 yr old f !$& , well , to anyone ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 20, 2018:
I once had some Muslim neighbors who were ethnic Albanians and they were absolutely great people and good neighbors in every way.
Some of those things that so grate on our sensibilities come from the harsh desert code of the Middle East and were social mores before the time of Mohamed. Those same social mores are seen in the Bible.
Not all Muslims are the same, but as for me, I will respect all of them.
Socially Responsible Investing
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 19, 2018:
I’m okay with guns and gold but don’t like candy and soft drinks. Trouble is that my fund is managed at different layers and I have no input, or if I do I am not aware of it.
If a corporation’s stock gets pushed down in value does that really hurt them or deter them? The remaining ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 19, 2018:
@JackPedigo
OK I follow you now.
Some of that mining is done with machinery also. If in places that manual labor is used, wouldn’t you think those workers would just quit if they didn’t like the work?
I remember an exposee by NPR on the sugar industry in Latin America. Seems the poor workers were having to cut cane with machetes. At the time I often cut alders and willows, etc all day with a machete so I wasn’t all that impressed. In South Florida I once witnessed a crew of Jamaican cane cutters and it was a beautiful thing to see.
The typical fat, weak American suburbanite knows nothing of manual labor and becomes all disturbed when he or she hears about it. Those exposees always harp on the low wages paid to the workers—low when expressed in US dollars at the current exchange rate. Nothing is said about what the workers can buy on their local market with the wages. You can bet that the workers would quit if they were dissatisfied. Suppose a company decided to be the good guys and pay $15US/hr. The economy of the country would be instantly wrecked. That is why the Army always issues script to soldiers to use in foreign countries, and it pays the local going rate for wages and supplies.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 19, 2018:
I’m okay with guns and gold but don’t like candy and soft drinks. Trouble is that my fund is managed at different layers and I have no input, or if I do I am not aware of it.
If a corporation’s stock gets pushed down in value does that really hurt them or deter them? The remaining ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 19, 2018:
@JackPedigo
OK I follow you now.
Some of that mining is done with machinery also. If in places that manual labor is used, wouldn’t you think those workers would just quit if they didn’t like the work?
I remember an exposee by NPR on the sugar industry in Latin America. Seems the poor workers were having to cut cane with machetes. At the time I often cut alders and willows, etc all day with a machete so I wasn’t all that impressed. In South Florida I once witnessed a crew of Jamaican cane cutters and it was a beautiful thing to see.
The typical fat, weak American suburbanite knows nothing of manual labor and becomes all disturbed when he or she hears about it. Those exposees always harp on the low wages paid to the workers—low when expressed in US dollars at the current exchange rate. Nothing is said about what the workers can buy on their local market with the wages. You can bet that the workers would quit if they were dissatisfied. Suppose a company decided to be the good guys and pay $15US/hr. The economy of the country would be instantly wrecked. That is why the Army always issues script to soldiers to use in foreign countries, and it pays the local going rate for wages and supplies.
I've finally given some responses to the people who responded to my not thought out post about ...
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 19, 2018:
Don’t sweat it. Some of ‘em ARE lazy and/or stupid. On the other hand, some people just like the freedom of sleeping outdoors. After all, it is cheaper.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 19, 2018:
@weelittleone
Maybe they could be politicians.
I had this all written and it disappeared when I went to verify that marlayne is a woman. I wanted to comfort her and assuage her guilt because what she said is partly true, which you acknowledge.
I in no way would withhold aid from those who are trying, who are seizing the day. There are many avenues for those people and they generally succeed. In this vein, an idea I favor is to have a lifelong subsistence income for all citizens, funded by a massive public trust fund, managed by government on behalf of the people. That way all would be treated equally and those with handicaps would not be abandoned.However, such a plan would take many years to implement.
A great many poor homeless people are addicted to drugs and alcohol. You cannot make them change. Give them stuff and you merely enable their behavior. The desire to change would have to come from them, which brings the question: If they are living for their addictions, then why do you want them to change? Could it be that it is you who has the problem? On the day they decide to change they’ll reach out for help, and that help is there, waiting to be given.
Believe it or not, a lot of “homeless” people are living their dreams. They enjoy being outside and they relish their freedom from structured jobs. They might get by on occasional day labor or by panhandling, but IMO they are not to be pitied or judged Ill.
That leaves the mentally ill, and I fully support public treatment for them and assistance with living expenses if they need it. I wish there were better ways than to give psychiatric medication. Counseling by professionals is needed, but even more, they need friends who will treat them with respect and love. I don’t have figures, but a large percentage of mentally ill people do get well.
I’m not in agreement that our system is totally broken. I live in a rural Alabama county, and we have a health department dedicated specifically to helping those with mental illnesses. Also I know of many people who receive public assistance. The question is how much should be done, and how it will be paid for.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 19, 2018:
Don’t sweat it. Some of ‘em ARE lazy and/or stupid. On the other hand, some people just like the freedom of sleeping outdoors. After all, it is cheaper.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 19, 2018:
@weelittleone
Maybe they could be politicians.
I had this all written and it disappeared when I went to verify that marlayne is a woman. I wanted to comfort her and assuage her guilt because what she said is partly true, which you acknowledge.
I in no way would withhold aid from those who are trying, who are seizing the day. There are many avenues for those people and they generally succeed. In this vein, an idea I favor is to have a lifelong subsistence income for all citizens, funded by a massive public trust fund, managed by government on behalf of the people. That way all would be treated equally and those with handicaps would not be abandoned.However, such a plan would take many years to implement.
A great many poor homeless people are addicted to drugs and alcohol. You cannot make them change. Give them stuff and you merely enable their behavior. The desire to change would have to come from them, which brings the question: If they are living for their addictions, then why do you want them to change? Could it be that it is you who has the problem? On the day they decide to change they’ll reach out for help, and that help is there, waiting to be given.
Believe it or not, a lot of “homeless” people are living their dreams. They enjoy being outside and they relish their freedom from structured jobs. They might get by on occasional day labor or by panhandling, but IMO they are not to be pitied or judged Ill.
That leaves the mentally ill, and I fully support public treatment for them and assistance with living expenses if they need it. I wish there were better ways than to give psychiatric medication. Counseling by professionals is needed, but even more, they need friends who will treat them with respect and love. I don’t have figures, but a large percentage of mentally ill people do get well.
I’m not in agreement that our system is totally broken. I live in a rural Alabama county, and we have a health department dedicated specifically to helping those with mental illnesses. Also I know of many people who receive public assistance. The question is how much should be done, and how it will be paid for.
What was something you once believed and later discovered you were wrong
Gareth comments on Oct 19, 2018:
When microwave ovens started to be available in the mid 70's I thought that they would pose adverse health risks that would become apparent in time. I'm happy to say that I now realise I was being unduly alarmist and I use my microwave daily - the shorter cooking times give fresher cooked food with ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 19, 2018:
@Gareth LOL. I guess I am just improper and will remain so.
I have a little surge of pleasure in getting you to reply. It’s the child in me.
Gareth comments on Oct 19, 2018:
When microwave ovens started to be available in the mid 70's I thought that they would pose adverse health risks that would become apparent in time. I'm happy to say that I now realise I was being unduly alarmist and I use my microwave daily - the shorter cooking times give fresher cooked food with ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 19, 2018:
@Gareth LOL. I guess I am just improper and will remain so.
I have a little surge of pleasure in getting you to reply. It’s the child in me.
What was something you once believed and later discovered you were wrong
Gareth comments on Oct 19, 2018:
When microwave ovens started to be available in the mid 70's I thought that they would pose adverse health risks that would become apparent in time. I'm happy to say that I now realise I was being unduly alarmist and I use my microwave daily - the shorter cooking times give fresher cooked food with ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 19, 2018:
I realise that I am somewhat of an uncouth American, but I brew my tea right in the cup for one and a half minutes and leave the tea bag in whilst I drink.
I drink green tea because it is said to prevent cancer. Few in my area drink hot tea at all—they like sweet iced tea.
Gareth comments on Oct 19, 2018:
When microwave ovens started to be available in the mid 70's I thought that they would pose adverse health risks that would become apparent in time. I'm happy to say that I now realise I was being unduly alarmist and I use my microwave daily - the shorter cooking times give fresher cooked food with ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 19, 2018:
I realise that I am somewhat of an uncouth American, but I brew my tea right in the cup for one and a half minutes and leave the tea bag in whilst I drink.
I drink green tea because it is said to prevent cancer. Few in my area drink hot tea at all—they like sweet iced tea.
What was something you once believed and later discovered you were wrong
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 19, 2018:
I once thought I had made a mistake but then I learned that I hadn’t.
That’s all I can think of right now.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 19, 2018:
I just remembered that circa 1980 I was saying that the home computer fad would be short-lived—that no one really needed a computer in their home.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 19, 2018:
I once thought I had made a mistake but then I learned that I hadn’t.
That’s all I can think of right now.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 19, 2018:
I just remembered that circa 1980 I was saying that the home computer fad would be short-lived—that no one really needed a computer in their home.
Do you believe that racism and hatred is taught in childhood?
Matias comments on Oct 19, 2018:
You do not have to teach children what psychologists call "ingroup bias": our inbuilt tendency to like "our" folks and tend to look down on and disparage folks who are somewhat different. There are several markers how this "otherness" is perceived: skin color, language, clothes...
Just ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 19, 2018:
@cava Couldn’t that be learned behavior? If the babies were old enough to crawl maybe they were just attracted to a woman who looked like their mother.
It would be interesting to know more about that 20% who were attracted to women of the other race. Maybe they’d been adopted or otherwise exposed to the other race.
Matias comments on Oct 19, 2018:
You do not have to teach children what psychologists call "ingroup bias": our inbuilt tendency to like "our" folks and tend to look down on and disparage folks who are somewhat different. There are several markers how this "otherness" is perceived: skin color, language, clothes...
Just ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 19, 2018:
@cava Couldn’t that be learned behavior? If the babies were old enough to crawl maybe they were just attracted to a woman who looked like their mother.
It would be interesting to know more about that 20% who were attracted to women of the other race. Maybe they’d been adopted or otherwise exposed to the other race.
Regarding the Soul / Afterlife: Some Random Thoughts.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 14, 2018:
Those extra personalities that share a single body are illusions, no different than the illusions you and I create when we identify with our bodies.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 19, 2018:
@johnprytz You keep referring to “you” as if I had existence as a separate entity. “i” simply don’t exist except as a bodily illusion. It’s like those multiple personalities we discussed earlier.
Universal Consciousness is not housed in bodies. Universal Consciousness observes and interacts with the river of organisms, all simultaneously. Just as a robot or a body can operate on its own without conscious oversight for a while, so can the world of bodies collectively, but without some sort of intelligent input eventually there’s trouble. If I am drunk or otherwise unfit for receiving intelligent input I’m liable to wind up in jail or even dead.
As an analogy, back to the driverless car. Ostensibly the car might be set up to go get its own fuel and maintenance. It’s a “burden” only to the car itself, and that’s not much of a burden since the car has no awareness. If there’s some sort of snafu such as a conflict in scheduling, or a malfunction in hardware that wasn’t foreseen by programmers, then Universal Consciousness comes to rescue the human/car team, overriding automatic processes and setting things aright.
So far as the burden humans feel in having to get their food, etc, I think there’s a reason for that feeling. It’s because of limited energy and resources. We are programmed to use economy—apportion our efforts among various goals. If we are feeling a burden, maybe it’s because we’re about to exhaust our energy and need to make changes. Maybe such feelings make up receptive to input from UC.
Why do “We” (Universal Consciousness) want all these robots in the first place. I don’t know but it sure spices things up. I know I sound like I know all about this stuff, but really it’s just some metaphysical speculation that fascinates me. At heart I am abysmally ignorant and bewildered.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 14, 2018:
Those extra personalities that share a single body are illusions, no different than the illusions you and I create when we identify with our bodies.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 19, 2018:
@johnprytz You keep referring to “you” as if I had existence as a separate entity. “i” simply don’t exist except as a bodily illusion. It’s like those multiple personalities we discussed earlier.
Universal Consciousness is not housed in bodies. Universal Consciousness observes and interacts with the river of organisms, all simultaneously. Just as a robot or a body can operate on its own without conscious oversight for a while, so can the world of bodies collectively, but without some sort of intelligent input eventually there’s trouble. If I am drunk or otherwise unfit for receiving intelligent input I’m liable to wind up in jail or even dead.
As an analogy, back to the driverless car. Ostensibly the car might be set up to go get its own fuel and maintenance. It’s a “burden” only to the car itself, and that’s not much of a burden since the car has no awareness. If there’s some sort of snafu such as a conflict in scheduling, or a malfunction in hardware that wasn’t foreseen by programmers, then Universal Consciousness comes to rescue the human/car team, overriding automatic processes and setting things aright.
So far as the burden humans feel in having to get their food, etc, I think there’s a reason for that feeling. It’s because of limited energy and resources. We are programmed to use economy—apportion our efforts among various goals. If we are feeling a burden, maybe it’s because we’re about to exhaust our energy and need to make changes. Maybe such feelings make up receptive to input from UC.
Why do “We” (Universal Consciousness) want all these robots in the first place. I don’t know but it sure spices things up. I know I sound like I know all about this stuff, but really it’s just some metaphysical speculation that fascinates me. At heart I am abysmally ignorant and bewildered.
Regarding the Soul / Afterlife: Some Random Thoughts.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 14, 2018:
Those extra personalities that share a single body are illusions, no different than the illusions you and I create when we identify with our bodies.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 18, 2018:
@johnprytz It’s not that I am removed from universal consciousness at death. It’s that I never was a body to begin with. We were not born and we will not die.
When I think of myself I might think of my body, my memories, my thoughts, my emotions, etc., but none of those things are worth a damn without conscious awareness. Universal consciousness enjoys interacting with the river of organisms but the life of a single organism is of little concern.
Suppose that river of organisms suddenly went dry because of some cataclysmic event. In a trillion years perhaps life would begin anew. From a cosmic perspective that trillion years would have zipped by in the blink of an eye—in no time at all in fact. Consciousness creates the sense of time.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 14, 2018:
Those extra personalities that share a single body are illusions, no different than the illusions you and I create when we identify with our bodies.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 18, 2018:
@johnprytz It’s not that I am removed from universal consciousness at death. It’s that I never was a body to begin with. We were not born and we will not die.
When I think of myself I might think of my body, my memories, my thoughts, my emotions, etc., but none of those things are worth a damn without conscious awareness. Universal consciousness enjoys interacting with the river of organisms but the life of a single organism is of little concern.
Suppose that river of organisms suddenly went dry because of some cataclysmic event. In a trillion years perhaps life would begin anew. From a cosmic perspective that trillion years would have zipped by in the blink of an eye—in no time at all in fact. Consciousness creates the sense of time.
One Man Could End World Hunger, but He Won’t
[truthdig.com]
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 13, 2018:
Baloney! If all of Jeff Bezos’s assets were evenly divided each person would receive five bucks, enough for a hamburger with fries. The thinking in this article is based on envy, and ignores some basic facts of economics. Paper wealth is not wealth. Real wealth consists of goods and services, and ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 17, 2018:
@jondspen Do you think that the most efficient way to distribute merchandise is through small local shops? Is the best way to feed the world through small subsistence farms? Should each family make its own clothes? Boy, you could sure create a lot of jobs that way. Whatever happened to economy of scale?
Compare our abundant lifestyles of today with life just a hundred years ago. Industry and trading have brought great advances. Throttle free trade and we’ll go backwards.Just a hundred years ago my folks were plowing with mules from dawn to dusk. They drew water from an open well and had an outhouse.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 13, 2018:
Baloney! If all of Jeff Bezos’s assets were evenly divided each person would receive five bucks, enough for a hamburger with fries. The thinking in this article is based on envy, and ignores some basic facts of economics. Paper wealth is not wealth. Real wealth consists of goods and services, and ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 17, 2018:
@jondspen Do you think that the most efficient way to distribute merchandise is through small local shops? Is the best way to feed the world through small subsistence farms? Should each family make its own clothes? Boy, you could sure create a lot of jobs that way. Whatever happened to economy of scale?
Compare our abundant lifestyles of today with life just a hundred years ago. Industry and trading have brought great advances. Throttle free trade and we’ll go backwards.Just a hundred years ago my folks were plowing with mules from dawn to dusk. They drew water from an open well and had an outhouse.
PragerFU: Free Will Follow-up - misterdeity
[youtube.com]
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 17, 2018:
By all rights we ought not have free will, or conscious awareness either, but we do. It is something that we experience continually.
Direct experience trumps philosophy.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 17, 2018:
@phxbillcee I watched all three of your videos all the way through. I have various objections to the information presented.
Starting with what is fresh in my mind, at the end of the third video comes a vehement attack on libertarian free will because those ideas are based on “metaphysics”. The metaphysics referred to challenges and threatens the world view of those who cling to a materialist/physicalist/reductionist philosophy. In this light, the entire spiel appears as an indoctrination piece in my mind. (Sorry, but I can not control my thoughts and beliefs. Even you have said as much. That’s just how I see it.)
I will not waste much time arguing against scientism because those who cling to that faith are generally adamant and totally unwilling to discuss any other options. I suppose it is a refuge from the stark, overwhelming glare of reality—whatever. Who am I to deprive them of their comfort? I will say though that it is pretty well established by physics that nature is not deterministic. Things happen without cause.
Going back to my first response, I said that I experience free will, and that personal experience trumps philosophy. You seemed to indicate that personal experience is not reliable because it is colored by prior experiences and filtered by the mind. If that is true, then shouldn’t we say the same about all our experiences? When does a personal experience become unreliable? I don’t believe that you can perfunctorily dismiss a person’s experience so easily. For example, Hurricane Michael recently blew through my region. It was a personal experience and I don’t think you can dismiss that.
When you think and analyze a philosophical idea like free will, is not that train of thought your own personal experience? As you say, personal experiences are unreliable. I would think that my direct experience of free will is more reliable than some mental rumblings originating in your brain.
The second video is wasted on me because it is all about our thoughts and the workings of our brains. I have already expressed the opinion that our bodies are nothing but robots, with no free will or conscious awareness. All the bodily decisions are based on instinct, learning, mental analysis, outside communication, or randomness. I gave the analogy of a driverless car, where consciousness coaxes the car into certain actions.
IMO the concept of free will is meaningless without the presence of conscious awareness. If I thought that conscious awareness somehow arose from the firing of neurons, then I would agree that there is no free will. However, I can not agree to that. There is no proof of such a thing and no one has the slightest idea of how it could happen.
On the contrary, since I have personal experience of awareness and free will...
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 17, 2018:
By all rights we ought not have free will, or conscious awareness either, but we do. It is something that we experience continually.
Direct experience trumps philosophy.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 17, 2018:
@phxbillcee I watched all three of your videos all the way through. I have various objections to the information presented.
Starting with what is fresh in my mind, at the end of the third video comes a vehement attack on libertarian free will because those ideas are based on “metaphysics”. The metaphysics referred to challenges and threatens the world view of those who cling to a materialist/physicalist/reductionist philosophy. In this light, the entire spiel appears as an indoctrination piece in my mind. (Sorry, but I can not control my thoughts and beliefs. Even you have said as much. That’s just how I see it.)
I will not waste much time arguing against scientism because those who cling to that faith are generally adamant and totally unwilling to discuss any other options. I suppose it is a refuge from the stark, overwhelming glare of reality—whatever. Who am I to deprive them of their comfort? I will say though that it is pretty well established by physics that nature is not deterministic. Things happen without cause.
Going back to my first response, I said that I experience free will, and that personal experience trumps philosophy. You seemed to indicate that personal experience is not reliable because it is colored by prior experiences and filtered by the mind. If that is true, then shouldn’t we say the same about all our experiences? When does a personal experience become unreliable? I don’t believe that you can perfunctorily dismiss a person’s experience so easily. For example, Hurricane Michael recently blew through my region. It was a personal experience and I don’t think you can dismiss that.
When you think and analyze a philosophical idea like free will, is not that train of thought your own personal experience? As you say, personal experiences are unreliable. I would think that my direct experience of free will is more reliable than some mental rumblings originating in your brain.
The second video is wasted on me because it is all about our thoughts and the workings of our brains. I have already expressed the opinion that our bodies are nothing but robots, with no free will or conscious awareness. All the bodily decisions are based on instinct, learning, mental analysis, outside communication, or randomness. I gave the analogy of a driverless car, where consciousness coaxes the car into certain actions.
IMO the concept of free will is meaningless without the presence of conscious awareness. If I thought that conscious awareness somehow arose from the firing of neurons, then I would agree that there is no free will. However, I can not agree to that. There is no proof of such a thing and no one has the slightest idea of how it could happen.
On the contrary, since I have personal experience of awareness and free will...
PragerFU: Free Will Follow-up - misterdeity
[youtube.com]
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 17, 2018:
By all rights we ought not have free will, or conscious awareness either, but we do. It is something that we experience continually.
Direct experience trumps philosophy.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 17, 2018:
@phxbillcee You present a puzzlingly enigma. I’ve been saying all along that our physical reality is an illusion—even our sense of self as a separate individual, but that we do have one real experience—that of conscious awareness and its accompanying free will. Now are you going to take even that away from me? :-(. This bears further thought.
I’ve been thinking of the bodies/brains/thoughts as something like driverless cars, having no conscious awareness and no true free will. The car can do a lot of things by itself through good programming, an internal database, and through outside communication via GPS and the like. For a driverless car to have much purpose it needs at least a little bit of conscious oversight. A conscious being wants to go to a particular place and that being has to nudge the car into action. The conscious being has little or no control over the internal affairs of the car. It can step in at appropriate times and influence things to some degree, but constant interference would be inefficient and possibly even dangerous.
This model requires thinking of ourselves, not as our bodies, but as conscious awareness itself.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 17, 2018:
By all rights we ought not have free will, or conscious awareness either, but we do. It is something that we experience continually.
Direct experience trumps philosophy.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 17, 2018:
@phxbillcee You present a puzzlingly enigma. I’ve been saying all along that our physical reality is an illusion—even our sense of self as a separate individual, but that we do have one real experience—that of conscious awareness and its accompanying free will. Now are you going to take even that away from me? :-(. This bears further thought.
I’ve been thinking of the bodies/brains/thoughts as something like driverless cars, having no conscious awareness and no true free will. The car can do a lot of things by itself through good programming, an internal database, and through outside communication via GPS and the like. For a driverless car to have much purpose it needs at least a little bit of conscious oversight. A conscious being wants to go to a particular place and that being has to nudge the car into action. The conscious being has little or no control over the internal affairs of the car. It can step in at appropriate times and influence things to some degree, but constant interference would be inefficient and possibly even dangerous.
This model requires thinking of ourselves, not as our bodies, but as conscious awareness itself.
Regarding the Soul / Afterlife: Some Random Thoughts.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 14, 2018:
Those extra personalities that share a single body are illusions, no different than the illusions you and I create when we identify with our bodies.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 17, 2018:
@johnprytz The only thing that makes sense to me is that conscious awareness is primary in the ultimate reality beyond our sensory world. While each of us seems unique and separate because of different memories and bodies, those things are ephemeral. The body/brain is creating the dream for each person, but “We” are not really that person IMO. Universal consciousness is observing all those dreams and interacting with the various organisms. It has its reason for doing so.
Our true essence is consciousness itself, and we are that in common. When my body dies the person that I think of as myself will disappear forever, but it is of no concern because I was never the body to begin with, as it seemed. The body was nothing but a robot.
You and I being the very same entity might seem a bit crowded at this point. Do we know each other well enough for that kind of union? :-)
It’s all just glimmers and wisps of ideas.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 14, 2018:
Those extra personalities that share a single body are illusions, no different than the illusions you and I create when we identify with our bodies.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 17, 2018:
@johnprytz The only thing that makes sense to me is that conscious awareness is primary in the ultimate reality beyond our sensory world. While each of us seems unique and separate because of different memories and bodies, those things are ephemeral. The body/brain is creating the dream for each person, but “We” are not really that person IMO. Universal consciousness is observing all those dreams and interacting with the various organisms. It has its reason for doing so.
Our true essence is consciousness itself, and we are that in common. When my body dies the person that I think of as myself will disappear forever, but it is of no concern because I was never the body to begin with, as it seemed. The body was nothing but a robot.
You and I being the very same entity might seem a bit crowded at this point. Do we know each other well enough for that kind of union? :-)
It’s all just glimmers and wisps of ideas.
One Man Could End World Hunger, but He Won’t
[truthdig.com]
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 13, 2018:
Baloney! If all of Jeff Bezos’s assets were evenly divided each person would receive five bucks, enough for a hamburger with fries. The thinking in this article is based on envy, and ignores some basic facts of economics. Paper wealth is not wealth. Real wealth consists of goods and services, and ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 16, 2018:
@jondspen It would be nice if the guy would spread his wealth around, but look at what he HAS contributed to society. He has brought us this fantastic on-line retail center that is convenient and saves travel costs. He has been rewarded in kind, but his having wealth in no way causes others to be poor.
If it’s clean water that’s needed around the world maybe we should invest in developing a well-digging technology that would meet that need. Direct action would be more effective than complaining because someone else is not doing the job.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 13, 2018:
Baloney! If all of Jeff Bezos’s assets were evenly divided each person would receive five bucks, enough for a hamburger with fries. The thinking in this article is based on envy, and ignores some basic facts of economics. Paper wealth is not wealth. Real wealth consists of goods and services, and ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 16, 2018:
@jondspen It would be nice if the guy would spread his wealth around, but look at what he HAS contributed to society. He has brought us this fantastic on-line retail center that is convenient and saves travel costs. He has been rewarded in kind, but his having wealth in no way causes others to be poor.
If it’s clean water that’s needed around the world maybe we should invest in developing a well-digging technology that would meet that need. Direct action would be more effective than complaining because someone else is not doing the job.
Regarding the Soul / Afterlife: Some Random Thoughts.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 14, 2018:
Those extra personalities that share a single body are illusions, no different than the illusions you and I create when we identify with our bodies.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 16, 2018:
@johnprytz Well, In the sense that the physical world is an illusion, our physical presence is illusional. By illusional I don’t mean it isn’t there, but just that its true reality is not what it seems. We live in a dream-world of mental symbols IMO.
Remember that those multiple personalities housed in one body also claim to exist and to be the body, but we know they are imaginary.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 14, 2018:
Those extra personalities that share a single body are illusions, no different than the illusions you and I create when we identify with our bodies.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 16, 2018:
@johnprytz Well, In the sense that the physical world is an illusion, our physical presence is illusional. By illusional I don’t mean it isn’t there, but just that its true reality is not what it seems. We live in a dream-world of mental symbols IMO.
Remember that those multiple personalities housed in one body also claim to exist and to be the body, but we know they are imaginary.
Regarding the Soul / Afterlife: Some Random Thoughts.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 14, 2018:
Those extra personalities that share a single body are illusions, no different than the illusions you and I create when we identify with our bodies.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 15, 2018:
@johnprytz If they are all just illusions none of them are the real personality. All are unreal. IMO the true self is pure consciousness. I say that we share that true self because our separate selves as identified with the bodies are illusions.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 14, 2018:
Those extra personalities that share a single body are illusions, no different than the illusions you and I create when we identify with our bodies.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 15, 2018:
@johnprytz If they are all just illusions none of them are the real personality. All are unreal. IMO the true self is pure consciousness. I say that we share that true self because our separate selves as identified with the bodies are illusions.
To you "Spiritualists" out there:
How were the "rules" of your afterlife set up?
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 14, 2018:
I put myself down as “spiritual”, but none of your questions apply to me. I am not claiming that there is a soul that flies up to heaven at death, etc. “Spirituality“ to me means that a person realizes that our perception of reality is illusional and that behind the scene lies true reality ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 15, 2018:
@GlyndonD You would be more persuasive if you actually addressed the issues and made intelligent arguments. Just saying “I’m right and you are wrong” is not a legitimate argument. It’s more like something that would be heard in an elementary schoolyard.
It is perfectly legitimate to think about and discuss metaphysical ideas. If we limited ourselves to only proven assertions we would never discover anything new. Open your mind.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 14, 2018:
I put myself down as “spiritual”, but none of your questions apply to me. I am not claiming that there is a soul that flies up to heaven at death, etc. “Spirituality“ to me means that a person realizes that our perception of reality is illusional and that behind the scene lies true reality ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 15, 2018:
@GlyndonD You would be more persuasive if you actually addressed the issues and made intelligent arguments. Just saying “I’m right and you are wrong” is not a legitimate argument. It’s more like something that would be heard in an elementary schoolyard.
It is perfectly legitimate to think about and discuss metaphysical ideas. If we limited ourselves to only proven assertions we would never discover anything new. Open your mind.
We should be responsible and live a debt-free life.
JanGarber comments on Oct 14, 2018:
I see nothing wrong with sensible debt.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 14, 2018:
To me sensible debt is secured debt loaned at a reasonable interest rate, and the means of repayment are definite, such as in business loans.
Many young college graduates of today start out under heavy debts with high interest rates, and there is no certainty that they will be able to repay their loans.
JanGarber comments on Oct 14, 2018:
I see nothing wrong with sensible debt.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 14, 2018:
To me sensible debt is secured debt loaned at a reasonable interest rate, and the means of repayment are definite, such as in business loans.
Many young college graduates of today start out under heavy debts with high interest rates, and there is no certainty that they will be able to repay their loans.
One Man Could End World Hunger, but He Won’t
[truthdig.com]
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 13, 2018:
Baloney! If all of Jeff Bezos’s assets were evenly divided each person would receive five bucks, enough for a hamburger with fries. The thinking in this article is based on envy, and ignores some basic facts of economics. Paper wealth is not wealth. Real wealth consists of goods and services, and ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 14, 2018:
@JoeChick I didn’t know he was so chintzy with paying his employees. maybe someday he’ll learn that’s not good policy.
So far as displacing jobs, viewed from an overall perspective that should be a good thing—just think, better efficiency means less work to be done and more time for people to relax and live. If it’s just work that’s wanted people could dig holes and fill them up, or something like that.
But of course there’s the problem of equitable distribution. If people are needy and can’t find jobs measures might be taken so that work is shared. Maybe a shorter workweek would help.
I’d like to see a massive public trust fund that would eliminate taxes and provide a life subsistence income for all citizens. Is that a pipe dream?
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 13, 2018:
Baloney! If all of Jeff Bezos’s assets were evenly divided each person would receive five bucks, enough for a hamburger with fries. The thinking in this article is based on envy, and ignores some basic facts of economics. Paper wealth is not wealth. Real wealth consists of goods and services, and ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 14, 2018:
@JoeChick I didn’t know he was so chintzy with paying his employees. maybe someday he’ll learn that’s not good policy.
So far as displacing jobs, viewed from an overall perspective that should be a good thing—just think, better efficiency means less work to be done and more time for people to relax and live. If it’s just work that’s wanted people could dig holes and fill them up, or something like that.
But of course there’s the problem of equitable distribution. If people are needy and can’t find jobs measures might be taken so that work is shared. Maybe a shorter workweek would help.
I’d like to see a massive public trust fund that would eliminate taxes and provide a life subsistence income for all citizens. Is that a pipe dream?
Does God Intervene In Human Affairs?
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 9, 2018:
What a bleak picture you paint!
I see nothing but beauty all around me.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 11, 2018:
@johnprytz it seems to me that rural, farming regions tend to be conservative. They don’t change as fast because of a sparser population and less cultural stimulation. Religion is only a part of that conservatism and is not the cause IMO. When folks vote for conservatives it’s not just because of religion. I imagine if you polled the members of one of those evil “evangelical” churches you’d find a variety of political opinions. The news media have gone slap crazy with their divisive, exaggerated propaganda. Remember that Obama was opposed to gay marriage in his first campaign. Also he was very hard on illegal immigrants and he fought against Islamic extremists. Everything gets overhyped and blown out of proportion.
That hurricane has passed and we had no damage and the power didn’t go off. It was said to be a category four, the biggest hurricane ever recorded to hit the panhandle, caused by global warming, blah, blah, blah.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 9, 2018:
What a bleak picture you paint!
I see nothing but beauty all around me.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 11, 2018:
@johnprytz it seems to me that rural, farming regions tend to be conservative. They don’t change as fast because of a sparser population and less cultural stimulation. Religion is only a part of that conservatism and is not the cause IMO. When folks vote for conservatives it’s not just because of religion. I imagine if you polled the members of one of those evil “evangelical” churches you’d find a variety of political opinions. The news media have gone slap crazy with their divisive, exaggerated propaganda. Remember that Obama was opposed to gay marriage in his first campaign. Also he was very hard on illegal immigrants and he fought against Islamic extremists. Everything gets overhyped and blown out of proportion.
That hurricane has passed and we had no damage and the power didn’t go off. It was said to be a category four, the biggest hurricane ever recorded to hit the panhandle, caused by global warming, blah, blah, blah.
Does God Intervene In Human Affairs?
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 9, 2018:
What a bleak picture you paint!
I see nothing but beauty all around me.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 10, 2018:
@johnprytz I think that “Bible Belt” moniker is greatly exaggerated.
http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/region/south/
If you click on the above link you'll see a rating of various religious practices and values in the South. Under each table is a tab to click on and see how the various regions compare in religious practices. If you look you'll see that while the South is indeed more religious, the differences among the regions are not very great. There are certainly not enough differences to warrant labeling the South as the "bible belt". The South is a huge and diverse region, the most populous region, with every conceivable religion and religious opinion.
IMO it is not religion that’s the problem. It’s a bunch of sleazy, egotistical, power-hungry politicians who stir up controversy in their efforts to gain votes. My fundamentalist neighbors have little influence on my life. So far as “evangelicals”, Hillary Clinton is a Methodist, and that’s evangelical. The religious angle is greatly overstated IMO.
Well, I have to backtrack because in my state the sale of sex toys is illegal but the law is ignored. Wouldn’t it be the ticket to be wrapped up in the bedroom and have the police beat down your door, storm in with automatic rifles, etc., seize the evidence, and cart you off to jail? I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at such a silly law and the silly politicians who maintain such a law.
But I really don’t expect any sort of religious takeover. My concern at the moment is that a huge hurricane is moving into our area, and will be here in hours. Power will no doubt be down, possibly for weeks. Cheers!
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 9, 2018:
What a bleak picture you paint!
I see nothing but beauty all around me.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 10, 2018:
@johnprytz I think that “Bible Belt” moniker is greatly exaggerated.
http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/region/south/
If you click on the above link you'll see a rating of various religious practices and values in the South. Under each table is a tab to click on and see how the various regions compare in religious practices. If you look you'll see that while the South is indeed more religious, the differences among the regions are not very great. There are certainly not enough differences to warrant labeling the South as the "bible belt". The South is a huge and diverse region, the most populous region, with every conceivable religion and religious opinion.
IMO it is not religion that’s the problem. It’s a bunch of sleazy, egotistical, power-hungry politicians who stir up controversy in their efforts to gain votes. My fundamentalist neighbors have little influence on my life. So far as “evangelicals”, Hillary Clinton is a Methodist, and that’s evangelical. The religious angle is greatly overstated IMO.
Well, I have to backtrack because in my state the sale of sex toys is illegal but the law is ignored. Wouldn’t it be the ticket to be wrapped up in the bedroom and have the police beat down your door, storm in with automatic rifles, etc., seize the evidence, and cart you off to jail? I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at such a silly law and the silly politicians who maintain such a law.
But I really don’t expect any sort of religious takeover. My concern at the moment is that a huge hurricane is moving into our area, and will be here in hours. Power will no doubt be down, possibly for weeks. Cheers!
Narcissistic Sociopath Symptoms
p-nullifidian comments on Oct 8, 2018:
Not sure where this stat comes from, but to be fair, according to UNICEF roughly 3.1 million children die from starvation / malnutrition each year, or about 8,500 per day. That this is a tragedy few would dispute, but it's also important that we don't overstate the problem.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 9, 2018:
@Hebert54 It’s less than a third of what was claimed. The problem is overstated by any measure.
p-nullifidian comments on Oct 8, 2018:
Not sure where this stat comes from, but to be fair, according to UNICEF roughly 3.1 million children die from starvation / malnutrition each year, or about 8,500 per day. That this is a tragedy few would dispute, but it's also important that we don't overstate the problem.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 9, 2018:
@Hebert54 It’s less than a third of what was claimed. The problem is overstated by any measure.
Can anyone show me scientific proof that a fetus is not human?
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 8, 2018:
According to my dictionary a fetus is an unborn or unhatched vertebrate in the later stages of development showing the main recognizable features of the mature animal. (Advanced English Dictionary)
So you see, while some fetuses are human, most are not. Does that take care of your problem?
It ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 8, 2018:
@Renickulous Yes, what of it?
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 8, 2018:
According to my dictionary a fetus is an unborn or unhatched vertebrate in the later stages of development showing the main recognizable features of the mature animal. (Advanced English Dictionary)
So you see, while some fetuses are human, most are not. Does that take care of your problem?
It ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 8, 2018:
@Renickulous Yes, what of it?
That spiritual feeling.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 4, 2018:
I wonder if all those legends and myths about gods arose just from story-telling, enlarged and reinforced with each generation. If you were a child, sitting around a fire, hearing those stories, you’d be captivated and you might believe them real.
IMO that sense of oneness comes from deep ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 7, 2018:
@SimonCyrene Well now, it’s just an Americanism that I grew up with. Sorry to bore you.
So far as oneness, the concept resonates with billions of people around the globe. Oneness was part of Aldous Huxley’s “Perennial Philosophy”.
I don’t think it’s something to be believed in a firm way as you would believe a mathematical theorem. It’s more a concept to be pondered.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 4, 2018:
I wonder if all those legends and myths about gods arose just from story-telling, enlarged and reinforced with each generation. If you were a child, sitting around a fire, hearing those stories, you’d be captivated and you might believe them real.
IMO that sense of oneness comes from deep ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 7, 2018:
@SimonCyrene Well now, it’s just an Americanism that I grew up with. Sorry to bore you.
So far as oneness, the concept resonates with billions of people around the globe. Oneness was part of Aldous Huxley’s “Perennial Philosophy”.
I don’t think it’s something to be believed in a firm way as you would believe a mathematical theorem. It’s more a concept to be pondered.
Regarding Resurrection
The cornerstone of Christianity is the resurrection of Jesus - assuming a ...
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 6, 2018:
If the resurrection actually happened it would certainly be an interesting anomaly, but its significance pales beside the absolutely overpowering miracle of every second of conscious awareness.
The Hindus have their avatars who are thought to be above death, and some Hindus see Jesus as a great ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 7, 2018:
@johnprytz I don’t believe in the supernatural. I was just trying to think of a word that would convey great awe and wonder. I still can’t think of an alternative.
There is an aspect to nature that we can’t perceive or understand but that doesn’t make it supernatural. This is twisting words I know, but you could say that the everyday physical world of our senses is supernatural because it is aetheral and ghostly, consisting only of crude symbols of the underlying reality.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 6, 2018:
If the resurrection actually happened it would certainly be an interesting anomaly, but its significance pales beside the absolutely overpowering miracle of every second of conscious awareness.
The Hindus have their avatars who are thought to be above death, and some Hindus see Jesus as a great ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 7, 2018:
@johnprytz I don’t believe in the supernatural. I was just trying to think of a word that would convey great awe and wonder. I still can’t think of an alternative.
There is an aspect to nature that we can’t perceive or understand but that doesn’t make it supernatural. This is twisting words I know, but you could say that the everyday physical world of our senses is supernatural because it is aetheral and ghostly, consisting only of crude symbols of the underlying reality.
Bildungsroman
noun, plural Bil·dungs·ro·mans, German Bil·dungs·ro·ma·ne ...
Marionville comments on Oct 6, 2018:
Is this word used in the English language? It is not in my dictionary.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 6, 2018:
@Marionville if I started saying that word nobody in me neighborhood would have the slightest idea of what it meant.
Marionville comments on Oct 6, 2018:
Is this word used in the English language? It is not in my dictionary.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 6, 2018:
@Marionville if I started saying that word nobody in me neighborhood would have the slightest idea of what it meant.
Question.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 5, 2018:
Humans will be humans, and the religious impulse is an integral part of humanity. Religions will spring up again and again. They’ll be new and different, and reflect the sensitivity and awareness levels of their eras. In many places around the world attempts have been made to stamp out ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 6, 2018:
@Triphid
No limits aye?. Can your dogs work out differential equations?
The discussion is supposed to be about religions of the future. I agree that some churches have had a negative effect on scholarship. On the other hand, at times churches have kept scholarship alive, especially the Catholic Church during the Middle Ages. I think you are exaggerating the power of religious organizations to stymie learning. Anyone wanting to learn will do so regardless of silly church dogma. There are many examples of great intellectuals who came from religious backgrounds and continued their religious sentiments all through life. Religion is not just about belief in dogma. Even today, in the US half of all scientists say they believe in God.
Back to the topic at hand, you seem to lump all churches together and insinuate that they need to somehow be eliminated if the human race is to advance. If you only looked you’d find various religious organizations that require no belief and that promote only awareness, awe, love, and appreciation for the staggering implications of the mystery of existence. It is hard for me to see how such appreciation in any way impedes knowledge. On the contrary, such appreciation spurs intense curiosity and is the driver of all human creativity. Without the religious impulse there’d be no science in the first place.
So as I said before, religion will evolve with the times.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 5, 2018:
Humans will be humans, and the religious impulse is an integral part of humanity. Religions will spring up again and again. They’ll be new and different, and reflect the sensitivity and awareness levels of their eras. In many places around the world attempts have been made to stamp out ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 6, 2018:
@Triphid
No limits aye?. Can your dogs work out differential equations?
The discussion is supposed to be about religions of the future. I agree that some churches have had a negative effect on scholarship. On the other hand, at times churches have kept scholarship alive, especially the Catholic Church during the Middle Ages. I think you are exaggerating the power of religious organizations to stymie learning. Anyone wanting to learn will do so regardless of silly church dogma. There are many examples of great intellectuals who came from religious backgrounds and continued their religious sentiments all through life. Religion is not just about belief in dogma. Even today, in the US half of all scientists say they believe in God.
Back to the topic at hand, you seem to lump all churches together and insinuate that they need to somehow be eliminated if the human race is to advance. If you only looked you’d find various religious organizations that require no belief and that promote only awareness, awe, love, and appreciation for the staggering implications of the mystery of existence. It is hard for me to see how such appreciation in any way impedes knowledge. On the contrary, such appreciation spurs intense curiosity and is the driver of all human creativity. Without the religious impulse there’d be no science in the first place.
So as I said before, religion will evolve with the times.
Question.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 5, 2018:
Humans will be humans, and the religious impulse is an integral part of humanity. Religions will spring up again and again. They’ll be new and different, and reflect the sensitivity and awareness levels of their eras. In many places around the world attempts have been made to stamp out ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 5, 2018:
@Triphid That’s an interesting perspective, but it’s one I don’t share.What about dogs? Don’t you think there’s a limit to what they can learn and understand? They are our cousins and are clearly limited. Why would we be exempt from limitations?
It’s not just brain capacity. Our way of knowing is based on a matter/space/time model and that model is no more than a crude symbolic representation of ultimate reality. In a crucial way we humans are abysmally ignorant of ultimate reality, and using current methods of inquiry, we will be forever ignorant and bewildered.
Religion is not going to stand in the way of learning. If anything appreciation for the mystery of reality lends the keenest of motivation to survive, learn, understand and live well.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 5, 2018:
Humans will be humans, and the religious impulse is an integral part of humanity. Religions will spring up again and again. They’ll be new and different, and reflect the sensitivity and awareness levels of their eras. In many places around the world attempts have been made to stamp out ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 5, 2018:
@Triphid That’s an interesting perspective, but it’s one I don’t share.What about dogs? Don’t you think there’s a limit to what they can learn and understand? They are our cousins and are clearly limited. Why would we be exempt from limitations?
It’s not just brain capacity. Our way of knowing is based on a matter/space/time model and that model is no more than a crude symbolic representation of ultimate reality. In a crucial way we humans are abysmally ignorant of ultimate reality, and using current methods of inquiry, we will be forever ignorant and bewildered.
Religion is not going to stand in the way of learning. If anything appreciation for the mystery of reality lends the keenest of motivation to survive, learn, understand and live well.
Question.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 5, 2018:
Humans will be humans, and the religious impulse is an integral part of humanity. Religions will spring up again and again. They’ll be new and different, and reflect the sensitivity and awareness levels of their eras. In many places around the world attempts have been made to stamp out ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 5, 2018:
@Triphid In no way do I oppose science or knowledge or the free spread of information!
What I am saying is that human knowledge has limits, and that at heart all of our highly vaunted knowledge is superficial. It will always be that way regardless of whether there are external influences or not. You must admit that there are some very deep and profound questions for which science has no answers, and in most cases does not even address.
What religions could do potentially is foster deep awareness, awe, and appreciation for existence. This in no way would impede the spread of knowledge. What it would do is promote value and respect for all life.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 5, 2018:
Humans will be humans, and the religious impulse is an integral part of humanity. Religions will spring up again and again. They’ll be new and different, and reflect the sensitivity and awareness levels of their eras. In many places around the world attempts have been made to stamp out ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 5, 2018:
@Triphid In no way do I oppose science or knowledge or the free spread of information!
What I am saying is that human knowledge has limits, and that at heart all of our highly vaunted knowledge is superficial. It will always be that way regardless of whether there are external influences or not. You must admit that there are some very deep and profound questions for which science has no answers, and in most cases does not even address.
What religions could do potentially is foster deep awareness, awe, and appreciation for existence. This in no way would impede the spread of knowledge. What it would do is promote value and respect for all life.
That spiritual feeling.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 4, 2018:
I wonder if all those legends and myths about gods arose just from story-telling, enlarged and reinforced with each generation. If you were a child, sitting around a fire, hearing those stories, you’d be captivated and you might believe them real.
IMO that sense of oneness comes from deep ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 5, 2018:
@SimonCyrene A sense of oneness is a subjective experience. Experiences might be illusory but they are not fallacies.
Oneness also comes forth in Hindu religious philosophy. You might disagree with the concept but you would have a heck of a time proving it to be a fallacy.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 4, 2018:
I wonder if all those legends and myths about gods arose just from story-telling, enlarged and reinforced with each generation. If you were a child, sitting around a fire, hearing those stories, you’d be captivated and you might believe them real.
IMO that sense of oneness comes from deep ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 5, 2018:
@SimonCyrene A sense of oneness is a subjective experience. Experiences might be illusory but they are not fallacies.
Oneness also comes forth in Hindu religious philosophy. You might disagree with the concept but you would have a heck of a time proving it to be a fallacy.
Discovery of first genetic variants associated with meaning in life -- ScienceDaily
dreamsinflux comments on Oct 4, 2018:
This is interesting but far to vague. It provoked more questions than anything else for me. I enjoyed it though. Thank you for sharing.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 4, 2018:
@dreamsinflux Could epigenetics play a role here? Seems like the happiness gene might get turned on under certain circumstances.
dreamsinflux comments on Oct 4, 2018:
This is interesting but far to vague. It provoked more questions than anything else for me. I enjoyed it though. Thank you for sharing.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 4, 2018:
@dreamsinflux Could epigenetics play a role here? Seems like the happiness gene might get turned on under certain circumstances.
Neuroscience for those in power..
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 2, 2018:
How do you know that conscious awareness of self is caused by the brain? There is no consensus among scientists on that issue.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 4, 2018:
@hugh That vast irrefutable evidence certainly proves the correlation of brain activity and bodily sentience, but it doesn’t address knowingness or deep conscious awareness IMO.
The two second time delay in becoming aware of an action ties in nicely with what I am talking about. The body/brain, as an automaton, is set up to survive and accomplish many tasks on its own without conscious oversight. If I want my body to go get a cup of coffe, I have to coax it into action. It’s not me personally who is going for the coffee—I never do anything directly. Why would I know the precise instant that the body will act? That depends on internal processes that are out of my control.
Incidentally, the body is fully capable of making decisions and taking actions on its own, but those actions and decisions are based on instinct, mental analysis, learning, or randomness, and are not an indication of consciousness or free will. It makes total sense that for some bodily actions I would only become aware later.
Neuroscientists might study the correlation between thoughts and neural activity until doomsday and they’ll be no closer to understanding consciousness. Consciousness and thoughts are different things. Ask your local meditator.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 2, 2018:
How do you know that conscious awareness of self is caused by the brain? There is no consensus among scientists on that issue.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 4, 2018:
@hugh That vast irrefutable evidence certainly proves the correlation of brain activity and bodily sentience, but it doesn’t address knowingness or deep conscious awareness IMO.
The two second time delay in becoming aware of an action ties in nicely with what I am talking about. The body/brain, as an automaton, is set up to survive and accomplish many tasks on its own without conscious oversight. If I want my body to go get a cup of coffe, I have to coax it into action. It’s not me personally who is going for the coffee—I never do anything directly. Why would I know the precise instant that the body will act? That depends on internal processes that are out of my control.
Incidentally, the body is fully capable of making decisions and taking actions on its own, but those actions and decisions are based on instinct, mental analysis, learning, or randomness, and are not an indication of consciousness or free will. It makes total sense that for some bodily actions I would only become aware later.
Neuroscientists might study the correlation between thoughts and neural activity until doomsday and they’ll be no closer to understanding consciousness. Consciousness and thoughts are different things. Ask your local meditator.
Neuroscience for those in power..
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 2, 2018:
How do you know that conscious awareness of self is caused by the brain? There is no consensus among scientists on that issue.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 3, 2018:
@Stephanie99 I don’t actually believe it with 100% certainty either, but the idea fascinates me. It’s the Hindu Brahman, or ultimate reality.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 2, 2018:
How do you know that conscious awareness of self is caused by the brain? There is no consensus among scientists on that issue.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 3, 2018:
@Stephanie99 I don’t actually believe it with 100% certainty either, but the idea fascinates me. It’s the Hindu Brahman, or ultimate reality.
Neuroscience for those in power..
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 2, 2018:
How do you know that conscious awareness of self is caused by the brain? There is no consensus among scientists on that issue.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 3, 2018:
@Stephanie99 They are checking for bodily sentience. The body was never anything but a robot. Whenever it appeared to have deep conscious awareness and free will, that was a manifestation of universal consciousness, which lives on and is immortal.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 2, 2018:
How do you know that conscious awareness of self is caused by the brain? There is no consensus among scientists on that issue.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 3, 2018:
@Stephanie99 They are checking for bodily sentience. The body was never anything but a robot. Whenever it appeared to have deep conscious awareness and free will, that was a manifestation of universal consciousness, which lives on and is immortal.
Fine-Tuning & Design: The Lego Blocks Analogy
To illustrate an aspect of apparent design and ...
FatherOfNyx comments on Oct 3, 2018:
I love Legos and have always used them to demonstrate who the universe and life appeared, without an intelligent driving force.
Say you take 1,000,000 copies of the same Lego set and dumped all the individual pieces in a giant tumbler. You turn on the tumbler and as the pieces are randomly ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 3, 2018:
Do you not wonder though where those natural laws of physics and chemistry came from? And what about the space and time that frame your particles?
Aren’t you taking a lot for granted?
FatherOfNyx comments on Oct 3, 2018:
I love Legos and have always used them to demonstrate who the universe and life appeared, without an intelligent driving force.
Say you take 1,000,000 copies of the same Lego set and dumped all the individual pieces in a giant tumbler. You turn on the tumbler and as the pieces are randomly ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 3, 2018:
Do you not wonder though where those natural laws of physics and chemistry came from? And what about the space and time that frame your particles?
Aren’t you taking a lot for granted?
A Natural Afterlife?
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 27, 2018:
Our time concept is bogus. There’s no after, there is only now. We are in heaven all the time. Our self-identity as a particular body is also bogus. “We” are all of consciousness—we are everyone all the time.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 3, 2018:
@johnprytz Yes, it is also very hard for me to believe that the firing of neurons in a brain could cause deep conscious awareness—same thing.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 27, 2018:
Our time concept is bogus. There’s no after, there is only now. We are in heaven all the time. Our self-identity as a particular body is also bogus. “We” are all of consciousness—we are everyone all the time.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 3, 2018:
@johnprytz Yes, it is also very hard for me to believe that the firing of neurons in a brain could cause deep conscious awareness—same thing.
Reality In Review: Part Two
Your Reality Starts With.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
There is no proof for your premise no.1. If you are going to make such absolute statements you need to provide proof or suffer a loss of credibility. The way you say it sounds like nothing but religious-like faith on your part.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 3, 2018:
@johnprytz I get what you are saying and I must admit that you could be right. However, my premis is that our true selves are not bodies. Our bodies certainly have their own memories, experiences, etc. but that is a sort of dream life. Beyond that is ultimate reality. If I identify as that ultimate reality all those genetic and environmental factors and influences are moot.
We keep saying the same things over and over.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
There is no proof for your premise no.1. If you are going to make such absolute statements you need to provide proof or suffer a loss of credibility. The way you say it sounds like nothing but religious-like faith on your part.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 3, 2018:
@johnprytz I get what you are saying and I must admit that you could be right. However, my premis is that our true selves are not bodies. Our bodies certainly have their own memories, experiences, etc. but that is a sort of dream life. Beyond that is ultimate reality. If I identify as that ultimate reality all those genetic and environmental factors and influences are moot.
We keep saying the same things over and over.
Neuroscience for those in power..
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 2, 2018:
How do you know that conscious awareness of self is caused by the brain? There is no consensus among scientists on that issue.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 2, 2018:
@FatherOfNyx For lack of credible evidence I am withholding belief in your claim.
Did you look at Conscious Realism? What is your opinion?
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 2, 2018:
How do you know that conscious awareness of self is caused by the brain? There is no consensus among scientists on that issue.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 2, 2018:
@FatherOfNyx For lack of credible evidence I am withholding belief in your claim.
Did you look at Conscious Realism? What is your opinion?
Neuroscience for those in power..
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 2, 2018:
How do you know that conscious awareness of self is caused by the brain? There is no consensus among scientists on that issue.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 2, 2018:
@FatherOfNyx Of course they aren’t going to say with assurance that it exists outside the brain. But many of them say that consciousness is a mystery, David Chalmers and others.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/jan/21/-sp-why-cant-worlds-greatest-minds-solve-mystery-consciousness
Apparently it’s no mystery to you. Please explain the mechanism by which the firing of neurons causes consciousness. You have made the bald-faced assertion that consciousness arises from the brain, so it is up to you to provide credible evidence for your claim.
Cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman has an interesting theory that he calls Conscious Realism.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 2, 2018:
How do you know that conscious awareness of self is caused by the brain? There is no consensus among scientists on that issue.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 2, 2018:
@FatherOfNyx Of course they aren’t going to say with assurance that it exists outside the brain. But many of them say that consciousness is a mystery, David Chalmers and others.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/jan/21/-sp-why-cant-worlds-greatest-minds-solve-mystery-consciousness
Apparently it’s no mystery to you. Please explain the mechanism by which the firing of neurons causes consciousness. You have made the bald-faced assertion that consciousness arises from the brain, so it is up to you to provide credible evidence for your claim.
Cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman has an interesting theory that he calls Conscious Realism.
Neuroscience for those in power..
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 2, 2018:
How do you know that conscious awareness of self is caused by the brain? There is no consensus among scientists on that issue.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 2, 2018:
@FatherOfNyx I agree that bodily sentience is a trait of the body, but deep conscious awareness is in a totally different category. No one knows what that is and there is certainly no proof that it arises from brain activity. Not knowing the nature of consciousness means that we don’t know who or what we ourselves are and we should not rest so proudly under the aegis of scientific knowledge.
BTW, half of all scientists in the US believe in God. When people say that there is a complete lack of evidence, what it means is that they do not accept the evidence, probably because they are clinging desperately to a shaky world view.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 2, 2018:
How do you know that conscious awareness of self is caused by the brain? There is no consensus among scientists on that issue.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 2, 2018:
@FatherOfNyx I agree that bodily sentience is a trait of the body, but deep conscious awareness is in a totally different category. No one knows what that is and there is certainly no proof that it arises from brain activity. Not knowing the nature of consciousness means that we don’t know who or what we ourselves are and we should not rest so proudly under the aegis of scientific knowledge.
BTW, half of all scientists in the US believe in God. When people say that there is a complete lack of evidence, what it means is that they do not accept the evidence, probably because they are clinging desperately to a shaky world view.
Is Globalisation loaded against the individual or a force for ‘good’?
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 1, 2018:
World-wide trade is very good for everyone. All trade is beneficial. In some cases individuals have to adapt to a new economic climate, but long-term we all benefit.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 2, 2018:
@powder Greater Australia benefits from cheaper prices. The owners of orange groves are inconvenienced, and their bank accounts take a hit, but they are free to produce other products.
Abundance of goods and services is intimately tied to free trade—the more global the better IMO. Think of the world as a big family.
WilliamFleming comments on Oct 1, 2018:
World-wide trade is very good for everyone. All trade is beneficial. In some cases individuals have to adapt to a new economic climate, but long-term we all benefit.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 2, 2018:
@powder Greater Australia benefits from cheaper prices. The owners of orange groves are inconvenienced, and their bank accounts take a hit, but they are free to produce other products.
Abundance of goods and services is intimately tied to free trade—the more global the better IMO. Think of the world as a big family.
A Natural Afterlife?
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 27, 2018:
Our time concept is bogus. There’s no after, there is only now. We are in heaven all the time. Our self-identity as a particular body is also bogus. “We” are all of consciousness—we are everyone all the time.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 2, 2018:
@johnprytz I’m not sure about all this, but I lean toward thinking that artificial intelligence is in an entirely different category than conscious awareness. That’s not to say that consciousness would be prohibited from acting through a computerized robot—that’s what happens in my book. But IMO the opening and closing of switches does not cause consciousness. Are you familiar with the Chinese room paradox? I wonder what the Chinese call it?
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 27, 2018:
Our time concept is bogus. There’s no after, there is only now. We are in heaven all the time. Our self-identity as a particular body is also bogus. “We” are all of consciousness—we are everyone all the time.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 2, 2018:
@johnprytz I’m not sure about all this, but I lean toward thinking that artificial intelligence is in an entirely different category than conscious awareness. That’s not to say that consciousness would be prohibited from acting through a computerized robot—that’s what happens in my book. But IMO the opening and closing of switches does not cause consciousness. Are you familiar with the Chinese room paradox? I wonder what the Chinese call it?
Reality In Review: Part Two
Your Reality Starts With.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
There is no proof for your premise no.1. If you are going to make such absolute statements you need to provide proof or suffer a loss of credibility. The way you say it sounds like nothing but religious-like faith on your part.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 2, 2018:
@johnprytz Perhaps it is only a sensation that we are separate from each other. As bodies we do have different genetic characteristics, different memories, different likes and dislikes. IMO our bodies are just robots without consciousness. The river of bodies, human and other, is used by universal consciousness.
If I were interested in robots there’d be nothing paradoxical about my owning several of them. Each of them would have its own set of memories, its own particular hardware, its own programming. Each might behave differently, but so far as true existence, they’d all just be me—-different manifestations of me. They’d run on their own part of the time but I would be able to direct their actions when needed. If one of them went to fetch the newspaper, that would be me fetching the newspaper.
There’s that mental condition once known as multiple personality disorder, where various personalities are exhibited by a single body, ala Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde. Each “person” is unaware of the others, and considers the body to be its own. So far as I know, no one personality is the “true” one. They are all just illusions or made up dreams, and that is all you and I are.
You are saying that without place and time there’d be no minds, and I agree. Conscious awareness is not mind. Each of the human robots has its own mind. Shut down your mind while awake and you’ll be meditating. You’ll experience conscious awareness in its pure form, with no objects. You’ll see that consciousness has no age, and that your consciousness is the same as everyone else’s.
NEW AGE??? Bah! :-)
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
There is no proof for your premise no.1. If you are going to make such absolute statements you need to provide proof or suffer a loss of credibility. The way you say it sounds like nothing but religious-like faith on your part.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 2, 2018:
@johnprytz Perhaps it is only a sensation that we are separate from each other. As bodies we do have different genetic characteristics, different memories, different likes and dislikes. IMO our bodies are just robots without consciousness. The river of bodies, human and other, is used by universal consciousness.
If I were interested in robots there’d be nothing paradoxical about my owning several of them. Each of them would have its own set of memories, its own particular hardware, its own programming. Each might behave differently, but so far as true existence, they’d all just be me—-different manifestations of me. They’d run on their own part of the time but I would be able to direct their actions when needed. If one of them went to fetch the newspaper, that would be me fetching the newspaper.
There’s that mental condition once known as multiple personality disorder, where various personalities are exhibited by a single body, ala Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde. Each “person” is unaware of the others, and considers the body to be its own. So far as I know, no one personality is the “true” one. They are all just illusions or made up dreams, and that is all you and I are.
You are saying that without place and time there’d be no minds, and I agree. Conscious awareness is not mind. Each of the human robots has its own mind. Shut down your mind while awake and you’ll be meditating. You’ll experience conscious awareness in its pure form, with no objects. You’ll see that consciousness has no age, and that your consciousness is the same as everyone else’s.
NEW AGE??? Bah! :-)
A Natural Afterlife?
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 27, 2018:
Our time concept is bogus. There’s no after, there is only now. We are in heaven all the time. Our self-identity as a particular body is also bogus. “We” are all of consciousness—we are everyone all the time.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 1, 2018:
@johnprytz “And an immaterial thing like what constitutes feminine beauty can cause definite physiological and psychological reactions within you!“.
Still does a little bit but nothing like it used to. :-(
When computers truly have conscious awareness, then I’ll have to change my mind.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 27, 2018:
Our time concept is bogus. There’s no after, there is only now. We are in heaven all the time. Our self-identity as a particular body is also bogus. “We” are all of consciousness—we are everyone all the time.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 1, 2018:
@johnprytz “And an immaterial thing like what constitutes feminine beauty can cause definite physiological and psychological reactions within you!“.
Still does a little bit but nothing like it used to. :-(
When computers truly have conscious awareness, then I’ll have to change my mind.
Regarding God's Nonexistence
Presumably True Believers don't believe in the actual existence of ...
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
I don’t think I’m a true believer in the sense you are talking about but I don’t call myself an atheist either so maybe I’ll do. You seem to be talking mainly about Yahweh, the Semitic God of the Old Testament and I am an atheist with respect to Yahweh. But I am very fascinated with the ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 1, 2018:
@johnprytz I see nothing at all wrong with quoting noted people. Whoever coined that “appeal to authority” phrase and implied that somehow the laws of logic were being broken was way off base in my opinion. In a court of law, aren’t the opinions of expert witnesses admissible as evidence?
I agree that the opinions of people like Max Planck and Edwin Schrödinger do not constitute a proof, but I never made that claim, and I am not trying to prove anything.
If nothing else, their opinions should justify giving the concept very serious attention. That’s all I’m doing really. I don’t know with absolute certainty about the concept—I’m just fascinated with the idea and I lean in that direction.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
I don’t think I’m a true believer in the sense you are talking about but I don’t call myself an atheist either so maybe I’ll do. You seem to be talking mainly about Yahweh, the Semitic God of the Old Testament and I am an atheist with respect to Yahweh. But I am very fascinated with the ...
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 1, 2018:
@johnprytz I see nothing at all wrong with quoting noted people. Whoever coined that “appeal to authority” phrase and implied that somehow the laws of logic were being broken was way off base in my opinion. In a court of law, aren’t the opinions of expert witnesses admissible as evidence?
I agree that the opinions of people like Max Planck and Edwin Schrödinger do not constitute a proof, but I never made that claim, and I am not trying to prove anything.
If nothing else, their opinions should justify giving the concept very serious attention. That’s all I’m doing really. I don’t know with absolute certainty about the concept—I’m just fascinated with the idea and I lean in that direction.
Reality In Review: Part Two
Your Reality Starts With.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
There is no proof for your premise no.1. If you are going to make such absolute statements you need to provide proof or suffer a loss of credibility. The way you say it sounds like nothing but religious-like faith on your part.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 1, 2018:
@johnprytz Your objections are valid from the perspective of an individual person with a human body. The idea of higher consciousness only makes sense from a universal perspective.
You say that consciousness arises from somewhere, but according to quantum gravity field theory, the concept of “where” is made up in our minds, and there are no things and no time.
The kind of consciousness you are talking about is bodily sentience, and yes, it is an attribute of the body. There remains the possibility that a different kind of consciousness pervades the universe and is primary—is the basis for reality. In that context. We as individuals can experience conscious awareness but can not understand it in terms of our symbolic mental model of reality. If you think of “WE” as the universal WE, not as bodies, then WE collectively experience consciousness, beauty, love, free will, etc.—things that make no sense from an individual bodily perspective.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
There is no proof for your premise no.1. If you are going to make such absolute statements you need to provide proof or suffer a loss of credibility. The way you say it sounds like nothing but religious-like faith on your part.
WilliamFleming replies on Oct 1, 2018:
@johnprytz Your objections are valid from the perspective of an individual person with a human body. The idea of higher consciousness only makes sense from a universal perspective.
You say that consciousness arises from somewhere, but according to quantum gravity field theory, the concept of “where” is made up in our minds, and there are no things and no time.
The kind of consciousness you are talking about is bodily sentience, and yes, it is an attribute of the body. There remains the possibility that a different kind of consciousness pervades the universe and is primary—is the basis for reality. In that context. We as individuals can experience conscious awareness but can not understand it in terms of our symbolic mental model of reality. If you think of “WE” as the universal WE, not as bodies, then WE collectively experience consciousness, beauty, love, free will, etc.—things that make no sense from an individual bodily perspective.
A Natural Afterlife?
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 27, 2018:
Our time concept is bogus. There’s no after, there is only now. We are in heaven all the time. Our self-identity as a particular body is also bogus. “We” are all of consciousness—we are everyone all the time.
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 30, 2018:
@johnprytz For most of my life I’ve been hearing about how consciously aware computers are just around the corner. All that’s lacking are a few programming tricks—feedback loops etc. and we’ll be there. It hasn’t happened and I’m very skeptical that it ever will. To believe in something like that is nothing but religious-like faith IMO.
There is another possible way, only slightly plausible, that I describe in my book, “The Staggering Implications of the Mystery of Existence”, available in the kindle store. Unfortunately the book contains woo and is unfit reading for a proper atheist such as yourself. :-(
One problem I have with tying consciousness to chemicals and inanimate objects is that those things have no objective reality—there are no things. Could it be that consciousness is primary? Have you read about the conscious realism of Donald Hoffman?
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 27, 2018:
Our time concept is bogus. There’s no after, there is only now. We are in heaven all the time. Our self-identity as a particular body is also bogus. “We” are all of consciousness—we are everyone all the time.
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 30, 2018:
@johnprytz For most of my life I’ve been hearing about how consciously aware computers are just around the corner. All that’s lacking are a few programming tricks—feedback loops etc. and we’ll be there. It hasn’t happened and I’m very skeptical that it ever will. To believe in something like that is nothing but religious-like faith IMO.
There is another possible way, only slightly plausible, that I describe in my book, “The Staggering Implications of the Mystery of Existence”, available in the kindle store. Unfortunately the book contains woo and is unfit reading for a proper atheist such as yourself. :-(
One problem I have with tying consciousness to chemicals and inanimate objects is that those things have no objective reality—there are no things. Could it be that consciousness is primary? Have you read about the conscious realism of Donald Hoffman?
Regarding God's Nonexistence
Presumably True Believers don't believe in the actual existence of ...
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
I don’t think I’m a true believer in the sense you are talking about but I don’t call myself an atheist either so maybe I’ll do. You seem to be talking mainly about Yahweh, the Semitic God of the Old Testament and I am an atheist with respect to Yahweh. But I am very fascinated with the ...
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 30, 2018:
@johnprytz You are correct. I am no physicist, but I, like you enjoy reading physics books for the layman.
I enjoy reading the metaphysical opinions of esteemed physicists, especially the founders of modern physics, such as Max Planck:
Max Planck said in 1944, "As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter".
Edwin Schrodinger:
Consciousness cannot be accounted for in physical terms. For consciousness is absolutely fundamental. It cannot be accounted for in terms of anything else.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
I don’t think I’m a true believer in the sense you are talking about but I don’t call myself an atheist either so maybe I’ll do. You seem to be talking mainly about Yahweh, the Semitic God of the Old Testament and I am an atheist with respect to Yahweh. But I am very fascinated with the ...
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 30, 2018:
@johnprytz You are correct. I am no physicist, but I, like you enjoy reading physics books for the layman.
I enjoy reading the metaphysical opinions of esteemed physicists, especially the founders of modern physics, such as Max Planck:
Max Planck said in 1944, "As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter".
Edwin Schrodinger:
Consciousness cannot be accounted for in physical terms. For consciousness is absolutely fundamental. It cannot be accounted for in terms of anything else.
Reality In Review: Part Two
Your Reality Starts With.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
There is no proof for your premise no.1. If you are going to make such absolute statements you need to provide proof or suffer a loss of credibility. The way you say it sounds like nothing but religious-like faith on your part.
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 30, 2018:
@johnprytz It can not be proven that conscious awareness arises from brain activity. Bodily sentience maybe, but not the kind of deep awareness by which we can ponder our own existence.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
There is no proof for your premise no.1. If you are going to make such absolute statements you need to provide proof or suffer a loss of credibility. The way you say it sounds like nothing but religious-like faith on your part.
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 30, 2018:
@johnprytz It can not be proven that conscious awareness arises from brain activity. Bodily sentience maybe, but not the kind of deep awareness by which we can ponder our own existence.
Are we really smarter than animals.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 29, 2018:
I’m not so sure. Lenin and Stalin took away religion and replaced it with science, and the results were mixed. No doubt there were some advantages but the human religious impulse springs back.
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 29, 2018:
@blumandolin yes, but wasn’t religion drastically curtailed, and wasn’t atheism taught in the schools.
“ In the time between 1927 and 1940, the number of Orthodox Churches in the Russian Republic fell from 29,584 to less than 500. Between 1917 and 1935, 130,000 Orthodox priests were arrested. Of these, 95,000 were put to death.”
(From Wikipedia)
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 29, 2018:
I’m not so sure. Lenin and Stalin took away religion and replaced it with science, and the results were mixed. No doubt there were some advantages but the human religious impulse springs back.
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 29, 2018:
@blumandolin yes, but wasn’t religion drastically curtailed, and wasn’t atheism taught in the schools.
“ In the time between 1927 and 1940, the number of Orthodox Churches in the Russian Republic fell from 29,584 to less than 500. Between 1917 and 1935, 130,000 Orthodox priests were arrested. Of these, 95,000 were put to death.”
(From Wikipedia)
A Natural Afterlife?
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 27, 2018:
Our time concept is bogus. There’s no after, there is only now. We are in heaven all the time. Our self-identity as a particular body is also bogus. “We” are all of consciousness—we are everyone all the time.
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 29, 2018:
@johnprytz So far as whether rocks and trees are conscious, I don’t know, but in asking that question we are viewing those things as objects, just as we are viewing our own bodies as objects or things. That might be the wrong way. Maybe we should think of everything as ourself—one big self.
Imagine that you have a bunch of finely made robots with which you interact. The robots can function on their own for basic survival tasks, but they have no conscious awareness or free will. They are limited to hard wiring, internal programming, logical analysis, or just randomness. At any one time some of those robots will be out of action. They’ll be recharging or in the shop or something. But you’ll still have plenty of other robots so it doesn’t matter. At some point the robots will be worn out. They’ll die, but no matter, New and better ones are on the assembly line.
To desire immortality as a separate individual seems a foolish and unattainable goal to me. We are immortal and in “heaven” right now at all times if we realize our true identity as universal consciousness. From the perspective of consciousness, the concept of afterlives makes no sense. There is no time.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 27, 2018:
Our time concept is bogus. There’s no after, there is only now. We are in heaven all the time. Our self-identity as a particular body is also bogus. “We” are all of consciousness—we are everyone all the time.
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 29, 2018:
@johnprytz So far as whether rocks and trees are conscious, I don’t know, but in asking that question we are viewing those things as objects, just as we are viewing our own bodies as objects or things. That might be the wrong way. Maybe we should think of everything as ourself—one big self.
Imagine that you have a bunch of finely made robots with which you interact. The robots can function on their own for basic survival tasks, but they have no conscious awareness or free will. They are limited to hard wiring, internal programming, logical analysis, or just randomness. At any one time some of those robots will be out of action. They’ll be recharging or in the shop or something. But you’ll still have plenty of other robots so it doesn’t matter. At some point the robots will be worn out. They’ll die, but no matter, New and better ones are on the assembly line.
To desire immortality as a separate individual seems a foolish and unattainable goal to me. We are immortal and in “heaven” right now at all times if we realize our true identity as universal consciousness. From the perspective of consciousness, the concept of afterlives makes no sense. There is no time.
Regarding God's Nonexistence
Presumably True Believers don't believe in the actual existence of ...
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
I don’t think I’m a true believer in the sense you are talking about but I don’t call myself an atheist either so maybe I’ll do. You seem to be talking mainly about Yahweh, the Semitic God of the Old Testament and I am an atheist with respect to Yahweh. But I am very fascinated with the ...
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 29, 2018:
@johnprytz IMO there’s no such thing as the supernatural. If you wanted to be technical I guess you could say that the everyday physical world of our senses is supernatural and ghostly and that ultimate reality is solid and real. We can not understand ultimate reality because our way of understanding is rooted in the matter/space/time model, which is nothing but a crude, symbolic representation of the real thing. This is not a religious sentiment. Read some books on physics.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
I don’t think I’m a true believer in the sense you are talking about but I don’t call myself an atheist either so maybe I’ll do. You seem to be talking mainly about Yahweh, the Semitic God of the Old Testament and I am an atheist with respect to Yahweh. But I am very fascinated with the ...
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 29, 2018:
@johnprytz IMO there’s no such thing as the supernatural. If you wanted to be technical I guess you could say that the everyday physical world of our senses is supernatural and ghostly and that ultimate reality is solid and real. We can not understand ultimate reality because our way of understanding is rooted in the matter/space/time model, which is nothing but a crude, symbolic representation of the real thing. This is not a religious sentiment. Read some books on physics.
Reality In Review: Part Two
Your Reality Starts With.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
There is no proof for your premise no.1. If you are going to make such absolute statements you need to provide proof or suffer a loss of credibility. The way you say it sounds like nothing but religious-like faith on your part.
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 29, 2018:
@johnprytz You can not prove that ANY of our experiences are caused by the brain. All you can say is that certain experiences correlate with certain brain activity.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
There is no proof for your premise no.1. If you are going to make such absolute statements you need to provide proof or suffer a loss of credibility. The way you say it sounds like nothing but religious-like faith on your part.
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 29, 2018:
@johnprytz You can not prove that ANY of our experiences are caused by the brain. All you can say is that certain experiences correlate with certain brain activity.
Do you think a boy really knows how to act with a girl and how does he learn that?
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
I think we are born with a lot of knowledge.
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 28, 2018:
@MarcT I was shooting from the hip, based on observations of newly born animals, and based on my children. What I noticed in both animals and humans is spatial orientation, muscle usage, and social behavior.
But luckily I am rescued by google: http://sites.bu.edu/ombs/2012/02/22/are-we-born-with-knowledge/
That is one of many on-line articles about innate knowledge. There’s a nice Wikipedia article under “innate knowledge”.
Not everyone is in agreement about the subject of course. My opinion is that there would not be enough time for a baby to learn all the things it’s capable of so soon after birth. One example of many: Take a bird dog puppy out in a field—one old enough to run around a little bit. Even though the puppy was never taught to hunt or never exposed to birds, that puppy will hunt birds like crazy. Is that instinct? Maybe it has to do with epigenetics.
The problem I have with the question at hand is that as we grow up our behaviors change, so that a once docile boy baby might turn into a raging bull as a teenager. There is definitely some learning in the equation, as well as innate knowledge.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 28, 2018:
I think we are born with a lot of knowledge.
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 28, 2018:
@MarcT I was shooting from the hip, based on observations of newly born animals, and based on my children. What I noticed in both animals and humans is spatial orientation, muscle usage, and social behavior.
But luckily I am rescued by google: http://sites.bu.edu/ombs/2012/02/22/are-we-born-with-knowledge/
That is one of many on-line articles about innate knowledge. There’s a nice Wikipedia article under “innate knowledge”.
Not everyone is in agreement about the subject of course. My opinion is that there would not be enough time for a baby to learn all the things it’s capable of so soon after birth. One example of many: Take a bird dog puppy out in a field—one old enough to run around a little bit. Even though the puppy was never taught to hunt or never exposed to birds, that puppy will hunt birds like crazy. Is that instinct? Maybe it has to do with epigenetics.
The problem I have with the question at hand is that as we grow up our behaviors change, so that a once docile boy baby might turn into a raging bull as a teenager. There is definitely some learning in the equation, as well as innate knowledge.
Correlation between success of relationships/friendships and region you're from?
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 8, 2018:
The South is a huge and diverse region of over 120 million people, more than the Northeast and Midwest combined. Every conceivable personality type, every political and religious opinion is present, along with every level of education and economic achievement.
You can find whatever you are ...
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 28, 2018:
@Hercules3000 http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/region/south/
If you click on the above link you'll see a rating of various religious practices and values in the South. Under each table is a tab to click on and see how the various regions compare in religious practices. If you look you'll see that while the South is indeed more religious, the differences among the regions are not very great.
Your experience is your experience, and I respect that. However, I have moved back home to a very rural part of Alabama, and in fourteen years not one local person has approached me about religion. I have a small group of neighborhood friends and not one of them is a believer in Christian doctrines.
That is my experience in my neighborhood. Things might be different elsewhere in the South.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 8, 2018:
The South is a huge and diverse region of over 120 million people, more than the Northeast and Midwest combined. Every conceivable personality type, every political and religious opinion is present, along with every level of education and economic achievement.
You can find whatever you are ...
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 28, 2018:
@Hercules3000 http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/region/south/
If you click on the above link you'll see a rating of various religious practices and values in the South. Under each table is a tab to click on and see how the various regions compare in religious practices. If you look you'll see that while the South is indeed more religious, the differences among the regions are not very great.
Your experience is your experience, and I respect that. However, I have moved back home to a very rural part of Alabama, and in fourteen years not one local person has approached me about religion. I have a small group of neighborhood friends and not one of them is a believer in Christian doctrines.
That is my experience in my neighborhood. Things might be different elsewhere in the South.
A Natural Afterlife?
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 27, 2018:
Our time concept is bogus. There’s no after, there is only now. We are in heaven all the time. Our self-identity as a particular body is also bogus. “We” are all of consciousness—we are everyone all the time.
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 28, 2018:
@johnprytz I agree with you so far as our day to day lives in the human realm. It feels as though we are our bodies, that we struggle and suffer, that we die.
The idea of universal consciousness only makes sense if you think of yourself as something other than an individual body. I am led in that direction because I don’t see how a system of cells by itself could have awareness and free will. I know it’s a stretch.
I had the proof all written up but have somehow mislaid it. Maybe the dog ate it.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 27, 2018:
Our time concept is bogus. There’s no after, there is only now. We are in heaven all the time. Our self-identity as a particular body is also bogus. “We” are all of consciousness—we are everyone all the time.
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 28, 2018:
@johnprytz I agree with you so far as our day to day lives in the human realm. It feels as though we are our bodies, that we struggle and suffer, that we die.
The idea of universal consciousness only makes sense if you think of yourself as something other than an individual body. I am led in that direction because I don’t see how a system of cells by itself could have awareness and free will. I know it’s a stretch.
I had the proof all written up but have somehow mislaid it. Maybe the dog ate it.
Where Did the Universe Come From?
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 26, 2018:
According to current quantum theories of physics, time does not exist. See Carlo Rovelli’s book “Reality is Not What it Seems”. If time is merely an illusion “come from” is not a meaningful concept, and your question can not be answered, especially not within the framework of our ...
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 27, 2018:
@Christologist Wow, fifteen. When I was your age I was too shy to carry on a conversation, and I certainly was not ready to talk about metaphysics. It appears that you have hit the ground running.
I have said all that I know about time and so will withdraw. I wish for you the very best in the years ahead.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 26, 2018:
According to current quantum theories of physics, time does not exist. See Carlo Rovelli’s book “Reality is Not What it Seems”. If time is merely an illusion “come from” is not a meaningful concept, and your question can not be answered, especially not within the framework of our ...
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 27, 2018:
@Christologist Wow, fifteen. When I was your age I was too shy to carry on a conversation, and I certainly was not ready to talk about metaphysics. It appears that you have hit the ground running.
I have said all that I know about time and so will withdraw. I wish for you the very best in the years ahead.
Do I exist? Can I really know anything? Where do you begin in philosophy?
Dietl comments on Sep 26, 2018:
Yes.
Depends on your definition of 'to know'.
Depends on your taste. I suggest trying essays of the famous philosophers on topics you like.
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 26, 2018:
@Christologist Knowing that you exist is not the same as understanding the underpinnings of reality. I experience my own existence also but it is only through the miracle of conscious awareness. What is conscious awareness? What is space? What is time? What is matter really? According to quantum field theory reality is not made out of matter and there are no “things”.
We have created a vision in our minds of reality but it is merely a symbolic representation of the real thing. It is superficial. Knowledge of this fact is almost universal. The proof is everywhere and you need only think briefly in order to realize the truth.
Dietl comments on Sep 26, 2018:
Yes.
Depends on your definition of 'to know'.
Depends on your taste. I suggest trying essays of the famous philosophers on topics you like.
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 26, 2018:
@Christologist Knowing that you exist is not the same as understanding the underpinnings of reality. I experience my own existence also but it is only through the miracle of conscious awareness. What is conscious awareness? What is space? What is time? What is matter really? According to quantum field theory reality is not made out of matter and there are no “things”.
We have created a vision in our minds of reality but it is merely a symbolic representation of the real thing. It is superficial. Knowledge of this fact is almost universal. The proof is everywhere and you need only think briefly in order to realize the truth.
Do I have free will?
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 26, 2018:
I lean toward thinking that our bodies are automatons and that they have no conscious awareness. How can a bunch of particles stuck together have awareness? The idea makes no sense to me, and no one seems able to explain how it could happen. Without conscious awareness obviously there can be no free...
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 26, 2018:
@Christologist There is no hard, testable evidence, and there need not be. It is perfectly legitimate to set forth unproven metaphysical ideas for discussion. The way to foster two way discussion is to present your own ideas on the subject in a respectful way. Demanding proof is a conversation killer.
There are various reasons that I like to muse on the concept of universal consciousness. That concept deals neatly with the enigma of personal identity. Also it addresses the seeming impossibility of organisms having conscious awareness and free will. It provides a sort of basis to get a glimmer of insight into ultimate reality beyond the physical world of our senses as defined by the mater/space/time model. Donald Hoffman’s theory of conscious realism delves into that aspect.
WilliamFleming comments on Sep 26, 2018:
I lean toward thinking that our bodies are automatons and that they have no conscious awareness. How can a bunch of particles stuck together have awareness? The idea makes no sense to me, and no one seems able to explain how it could happen. Without conscious awareness obviously there can be no free...
WilliamFleming replies on Sep 26, 2018:
@Christologist There is no hard, testable evidence, and there need not be. It is perfectly legitimate to set forth unproven metaphysical ideas for discussion. The way to foster two way discussion is to present your own ideas on the subject in a respectful way. Demanding proof is a conversation killer.
There are various reasons that I like to muse on the concept of universal consciousness. That concept deals neatly with the enigma of personal identity. Also it addresses the seeming impossibility of organisms having conscious awareness and free will. It provides a sort of basis to get a glimmer of insight into ultimate reality beyond the physical world of our senses as defined by the mater/space/time model. Donald Hoffman’s theory of conscious realism delves into that aspect.
Photos
Details
Skeptic, Freethinker, Spiritual
Here for community - BirthdayMarch 2
- EnjoysMusic, Science, Books, Outdoors, Love, Games
- EducationCollege
- Top tags#religion #religious #god #world #existence #belief #church #atheism #fear #truth #Atheist #reason #Awe #evidence #humans #religions #laws #government #book #scientific
- Level8 (88,015pts)
- Followers 22
- Fans 0
- Following 18
- Fav. Posts 2
- Joined Apr 18th, 2018
-
Last Visit
Over a year ago
Not in search results