I don't need to know all about it. Do some reading on brain damage, that should be enough.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Neo meaning New. New-Light science? I don't get it!
Let's see, damage to Broca's area causes something called Broca's aphasia where a person cannot speak or make out words.
Damage to Wernicke's area causes receptive aphasia where a person cannot hear musical sounds, even a water-fall, or knock at their door.
Damage to the angular gyrus causes a person to lose association between sight, sound, touch and so on. They can see a pen, but can't make the association that it is a pen, if they are holding the pen, they don't know that they are holding the same object they are seeing.
Damage to particular halves of the brain can result in some strange disassociations where the subject thinks half of their body belongs to someone else.
Cortical blindness, which is damage to the visual cortex, also known as Anton-Babinksi syndrome, causes a person to not be able to see, but their brain confabulates, so they think they can see, they don't know that they can't see.
Damage to the frontal lobe, the executive inhibitory feature of the brain, causes a person to act as if they are uninhibited all the time, kind of like being totally drunk.
Severing the Corpus Callosum, the fibre that connects the two hemispheres, causes a person to split in two. There are essentially two people controlling opposite sides of the body. It's also called Split-Brain and includes a Split-Consciousness.
Damage to the anterior cingulate sulcus in either hemisphere removes any sense of authorship (Free-will) over the thoughts, emotions, and actions of the opposite side of the body/brain.
Look it all up, or check out Brain-Mind.com and the Brain-Mind lectures on video.google
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Neo meaning New. New-Light science? I don't get it!
Let's see, damage to Broca's area causes something called Broca's aphasia where a person cannot speak or make out words.
Damage to Wernicke's area causes receptive aphasia where a person cannot hear musical sounds, even a water-fall, or knock at their door.
Damage to the angular gyrus causes a person to lose association between sight, sound, touch and so on. They can see a pen, but can't make the association that it is a pen, if they are holding the pen, they don't know that they are holding the same object they are seeing.
Damage to particular halves of the brain can result in some strange disassociations where the subject thinks half of their body belongs to someone else.
Cortical blindness, which is damage to the visual cortex, also known as Anton-Babinksi syndrome, causes a person to not be able to see, but their brain confabulates, so they think they can see, they don't know that they can't see.
Damage to the frontal lobe, the executive inhibitory feature of the brain, causes a person to act as if they are uninhibited all the time, kind of like being totally drunk.
Severing the Corpus Callosum, the fibre that connects the two hemispheres, causes a person to split in two. There are essentially two people controlling opposite sides of the body. It's also called Split-Brain and includes a Split-Consciousness.
Damage to the anterior cingulate sulcus in either hemisphere removes any sense of authorship (Free-will) over the thoughts, emotions, and actions of the opposite side of the body/brain.
Look it all up, or check out Brain-Mind.com and the Brain-Mind lectures on video.google
And that's all...what it is.
Neo-light science...
i meant for the wonder (and dogmatic assurance) you are still experiencing at all the new knowledge you have been taking in this past year. there is a balance in aquiring knowledge, yet not becoming "Knowledge." You know?
i meant for the wonder (and dogmatic assurance) you are still experiencing at all the new knowledge you have been taking in this past year. there is a balance in aquiring knowledge, yet not becoming "Knowledge." You know?
Hehe, I've watched a video about Carl Sagan's The Demon-Haunted World that was about fact-memorizing vs imagination. You need both and I have both. I imagine some facts before I ever learn about them. What I don't do is claim they are facts until I've learned about them.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Hehe, I've watched a video about Carl Sagan's The Demon-Haunted World that was about fact-memorizing vs imagination. You need both and I have both. I imagine some facts before I ever learn about them. What I don't do is claim they are facts until I've learned about them.
Everyone probably does that.
Some people are kind of enthusiastic about it, if ya know what i mean.
Um, facts are kind of shit. Knowledge is power, sure, but limited knowledge is a curse. I mean, education as you know, is more than just facts, and greater still is that education is about a multitude of things.
Everyone probably does that.
Some people are kind of enthusiastic about it, if ya know what i mean.
Um, facts are kind of shit. Knowledge is power, sure, but limited knowledge is a curse. I mean, education as you know, is more than just facts, and greater still is that education is about a multitude of things.
just don't get nihilistic on me like Fins. Up is left and left is down, we've no idea what's going round, we speak can't right, cause ain't no thing, knowledge is soup and spin is fling.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
just don't get nihilistic on me like Fins. Up is left and left is down, we've no idea what's going round, we speak can't right, cause ain't no thing, knowledge is soup and spin is fling.
Fins did that?
Hmm. He's literature-English-language oriented, so I guess... He likes to have his fun.
Well, this argument raged in philosophical circles, around the time of Immanuel Kant. Kant came up with a deontological ethical concept called the categorical imperative. It sparked fraught debate in its time. Do read this Wikipedia link, because it covers a lot of the ground of this sort of discussion.
Neo meaning New. New-Light science? I don't get it!
Let's see, damage to Broca's area causes something called Broca's aphasia where a person cannot speak or make out words.
Damage to Wernicke's area causes receptive aphasia where a person cannot hear musical sounds, even a water-fall, or knock at their door.
Damage to the angular gyrus causes a person to lose association between sight, sound, touch and so on. They can see a pen, but can't make the association that it is a pen, if they are holding the pen, they don't know that they are holding the same object they are seeing.
Damage to particular halves of the brain can result in some strange disassociations where the subject thinks half of their body belongs to someone else.
Cortical blindness, which is damage to the visual cortex, also known as Anton-Babinksi syndrome, causes a person to not be able to see, but their brain confabulates, so they think they can see, they don't know that they can't see.
Damage to the frontal lobe, the executive inhibitory feature of the brain, causes a person to act as if they are uninhibited all the time, kind of like being totally drunk.
Severing the Corpus Callosum, the fibre that connects the two hemispheres, causes a person to split in two. There are essentially two people controlling opposite sides of the body. It's also called Split-Brain and includes a Split-Consciousness.
Damage to the anterior cingulate sulcus in either hemisphere removes any sense of authorship (Free-will) over the thoughts, emotions, and actions of the opposite side of the body/brain.
Look it all up, or check out Brain-Mind.com and the Brain-Mind lectures on video.google
Actually, "neo-light science" is not a bad descriptor of your dalliance with knowledge and study. Kinda like "new-age" desribes a flirtation with wisdom without ever actually getting it quite right.
In your list above there are a bunch of facts and some "close but not close enough" gross misunderstandings, which demonstarte your "lite" approach to knowledge acquisition. I have pointed out several important errors to you in teh past, but you usually ignore that.
You could spend the rest of your life in a library containing enough information about how to build teh Sydney Harbour Bridge, and still not know how to build that bridge.
Acquisition of datum pieces is not the same as acquisition of knowldege.
On thread, I am glad I lacjk the type of moral which might allow me to be hateful, judgemental, to kill my own family member in sacrifice or to restore family honor, to stone a woman, to burn withches at the stake or just to be a petty small minded sanctimonius prick.
I'd rather be the half-decent athiest that I am thanks.
Actually, "neo-light science" is not a bad descriptor of your dalliance with knowledge and study. Kinda like "new-age" desribes a flirtation with wisdom without ever actually getting it quite right.
In your list above there are a bunch of facts and some "close but not close enough" gross misunderstandings, which demonstarte your "lite" approach to knowledge acquisition. I have pointed out several important errors to you in teh past, but you usually ignore that.
You could spend the rest of your life in a library containing enough information about how to build teh Sydney Harbour Bridge, and still not know how to build that bridge.
Acquisition of datum pieces is not the same as acquisition of knowldege.
On thread, I am glad I lacjk the type of moral which might allow me to be hateful, judgemental, to kill my own family member in sacrifice or to restore family honor, to stone a woman, to burn withches at the stake or just to be a petty small minded sanctimonius prick.
I'd rather be the half-decent athiest that I am thanks.
I think you will have to assume for the most part that what I'm saying has weight to it, but the exact details might be off, I provided the source for my knowledge and you are more then welcome to learn about it yourself.
This brings us to memory. You seem to be Brain savvy. So you know how the brain organizes memories and how memories can be lost or vague. I can explain a lot of things perfectly and other things I do have to confabulate. Confabulation is a natural part of human life. You know what a Hopfield network is, so I won't bother explaining it. However, you also know that damage to a number of the nodes requires some degree of confabulation. I don't mean in the sense of making stuff up. The basic theory does no depend on the specifics of brain damage only that brain damage exists. I'd be more than happy for you to humor me with your great knowledge in this subject. I know how memory works and I know the more I read it and talk about it, the better I will know it.
Anyway, I'm not being a prick. That is you confabulating.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I think you will have to assume for the most part that what I'm saying has weight to it, but the exact details might be off, I provided the source for my knowledge and you are more then welcome to learn about it yourself.
This brings us to memory. You seem to be Brain savvy. So you know how the brain organizes memories and how memories can be lost or vague. I can explain a lot of things perfectly and other things I do have to confabulate. Confabulation is a natural part of human life. You know what a Hopfield network is, so I won't bother explaining it. However, you also know that damage to a number of the nodes requires some degree of confabulation. I don't mean in the sense of making stuff up. The basic theory does no depend on the specifics of brain damage only that brain damage exists. I'd be more than happy for you to humor me with your great knowledge in this subject. I know how memory works and I know the more I read it and talk about it, the better I will know it.
Anyway, I'm not being a prick. That is you confabulating.
See, that is he difference between "heavy scince" and "lite science". Heavy science pays atetntion to the details.
Scientists don't indulge in confabulation, that's a new-age or pseudo-science trait.
Memory is interesting, we remember best that which is crucial to our survival.
Memory is subject to contamination because we re-arange mameories during the process of reasoning, and we tell oureselves things we want to know, and "create" memories at times.
An animal like a horse does neither of these things, and their memory is much more robust and less subject to contamination than ours.
I have no desire to educate you, nor do I profess a "great knowledge", indeed much less than you do. My neuro-anatomy was never top notch, but I know enough to identify several errors on your list. I am way beyond having a need to add to my basic life-science knowledge base, I am way more interested in playing guitar.
The prick reference was clearly not to you or anybody on this board. It was a reference to my idea of a narrow-minded right-wimg religious nutter of the type who might say that I have no morals because I am an athiest.
See, that is he difference between "heavy scince" and "lite science". Heavy science pays atetntion to the details.
Scientists don't indulge in confabulation, that's a new-age or pseudo-science trait.
Memory is interesting, we remember best that which is crucial to our survival.
Memory is subject to contamination because we re-arange mameories during the process of reasoning, and we tell oureselves things we want to know, and "create" memories at times.
An animal like a horse does neither of these things, and their memory is much more robust and less subject to contamination than ours.
I have no desire to educate you, nor do I profess a "great knowledge", indeed much less than you do. My neuro-anatomy was never top notch, but I know enough to identify several errors on your list. I am way beyond having a need to add to my basic life-science knowledge base, I am way more interested in playing guitar.
The prick reference was clearly not to you or anybody on this board. It was a reference to my idea of a narrow-minded right-wimg religious nutter of the type who might say that I have no morals because I am an athiest.
i am an atheist. i have morals. my morality is sorely tested when supposed tolerant christians tell me im going to hell. at which point i smile and say, 'if i actually believed in a hell that would concern me. but seeing's how i don't please go away.' or when supposed christians try and justify war to me whilst claiming a belief in jesus as their lord and saviour. somehow they seem not to understand the tenets of christ's teachings.
i was having a conversation with a friend who is a believer, on our daily walk this morning. 'you think about it', she said,' why would people bother to get up in the morning if there was no God and no afterlife. what would there be to live for?'
oh heck i don't know perhaps the life they have NOW, not one promised to them AFTER they're dead.
what's the point in living a life where the reward is eternal life in heaven? who the fuck wants to live forever. and why do you think we should anyway? how arrogant is Mankind to think that he is deserving of such a thing over all the other creatures. creatures who live to survive. Man is the most destructive force on this Earth and he feels somehow, that is deserving of a reward after death. if i were God i'd tell the lot of us, as a species we blew it and there is no place for us in his heaven. that is of course, if i were a believer .
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
See, that is he difference between "heavy scince" and "lite science". Heavy science pays atetntion to the details.
Scientists don't indulge in confabulation, that's a new-age or pseudo-science trait.
Memory is interesting, we remember best that which is crucial to our survival.
Memory is subject to contamination because we re-arange mameories during the process of reasoning, and we tell oureselves things we want to know, and "create" memories at times.
An animal like a horse does neither of these things, and their memory is much more robust and less subject to contamination than ours.
I have no desire to educate you, nor do I profess a "great knowledge", indeed much less than you do. My neuro-anatomy was never top notch, but I know enough to identify several errors on your list. I am way beyond having a need to add to my basic life-science knowledge base, I am way more interested in playing guitar.
The prick reference was clearly not to you or anybody on this board. It was a reference to my idea of a narrow-minded right-wimg religious nutter of the type who might say that I have no morals because I am an athiest.
I suppose if I did pay attention to the detail you would have a decent rebuttal?
I'm interested in hearing which points were wrong. I'll give you that to some degree it might be inaccurate, but you haven't said where and I question how certain you are that they are actually wrong. Furthermore how minor nuances affect the over truth that humans are merely patterns in the fabric of matter. If the pattern is disrupted then the human no longer exists.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Dr: "Give me your left hand!" (The patient presents the right hand. The doctor takes hold of the right hand.)
Dr: "Give me your left hand!" (The patient looked puzzled and did not move.)
Dr: "Is there anything wrong with your left hand?"
Pt: "No, doctor."
Dr. "Why don't you move it, then?" (The left hand was held before her eyes.)
Pt.: "I don't know."
Dr: "Is this your hand?"
Pt: "Not mine, doctor."
Dr: "Whose hand is it, then?"
Pt: "I supposed it's yours, doctor."
Dr: "No, it's not. I've already got two hands. Look at it carefully."
Pt. "It is not mine, doctor."
Dr: "Yes it is, look at that ring; whose ring is it?"
Pt.: "That's my ring; you've got my ring, doctor."
Dr: "Look at it--it is your hand.
Pt: "Oh, no doctor."
Dr: "Where is your left hand then?"
Pt: "Somewhere here, I think." (Making groping movements near her left shoulder.) (Adapted from Sandifer, 1946).
It can be said that a person has lied when he or she knowingly possesses the truth yet consciously attempts to deceive another person. However, it sometimes happens that a person half persuades themselves that the lie they have told is true and then behaves accordingly. In these instances it can be said that they have engaged in self-deception (Joseph, 1982, 1986, 1988).
Self deception is not uncommon among men and women, due in part to the manner in which the brain and mind are organized. That is, the language dominant left hemisphere is often unable to fully verbally comprehend or gain complete verbal access to non-veral and emotional impulses and non-linguistic knowledge sources, including memories, stored or generated in the right half of the brain or limbic system. Some impulses may also be partially or fully inhibited before reaching the language dominant left hemisphere by the frontal lobes (Joseph, 1999).
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I suppose if I did pay attention to the detail you would have a decent rebuttal?
I'm interested in hearing which points were wrong. I'll give you that to some degree it might be inaccurate, but you haven't said where and I question how certain you are that they are actually wrong. Furthermore how minor nuances affect the over truth that humans are merely patterns in the fabric of matter. If the pattern is disrupted then the human no longer exists.
You are inferring or assuming that I am "rebutting" for teh sake of it. If youn insist on basing your arguments on scientific facts, you need to pay attention to detail.
I am disinclined to discuss specifics because that would be off topic (as well as boring and not of interest to me), just as your whole post was initially, as was your presentation of the 'whose hand is it really" story.
I am familiar with the "baffle em with bullshit" approach, and am unimpressed. As I would say to an examinee who gave me that, "very nice, now answer the question".
For someone given to bitching to mods about thread integrity, you don't seem to have any issues with hijacking when it suits you.
Dr: "Give me your left hand!" (The patient presents the right hand. The doctor takes hold of the right hand.)
Dr: "Give me your left hand!" (The patient looked puzzled and did not move.)
Dr: "Is there anything wrong with your left hand?"
Pt: "No, doctor."
Dr. "Why don't you move it, then?" (The left hand was held before her eyes.)
Pt.: "I don't know."
Dr: "Is this your hand?"
Pt: "Not mine, doctor."
Dr: "Whose hand is it, then?"
Pt: "I supposed it's yours, doctor."
Dr: "No, it's not. I've already got two hands. Look at it carefully."
Pt. "It is not mine, doctor."
Dr: "Yes it is, look at that ring; whose ring is it?"
Pt.: "That's my ring; you've got my ring, doctor."
Dr: "Look at it--it is your hand.
Pt: "Oh, no doctor."
Dr: "Where is your left hand then?"
Pt: "Somewhere here, I think." (Making groping movements near her left shoulder.) (Adapted from Sandifer, 1946).
It can be said that a person has lied when he or she knowingly possesses the truth yet consciously attempts to deceive another person. However, it sometimes happens that a person half persuades themselves that the lie they have told is true and then behaves accordingly. In these instances it can be said that they have engaged in self-deception (Joseph, 1982, 1986, 1988).
Self deception is not uncommon among men and women, due in part to the manner in which the brain and mind are organized. That is, the language dominant left hemisphere is often unable to fully verbally comprehend or gain complete verbal access to non-veral and emotional impulses and non-linguistic knowledge sources, including memories, stored or generated in the right half of the brain or limbic system. Some impulses may also be partially or fully inhibited before reaching the language dominant left hemisphere by the frontal lobes (Joseph, 1999).
I have a thread that is current on AET called, "preaching then stealing". It kinda shows how I feel about this.
I am agnostic, leaning more towards atheist. I have values and morals. Mine stem from the kind of world I wish to live in. I am smart enough to know that if we did not abide by some kind of value/moral driven behavior, we would live in a world that would be a scene out of the movie, Escape From New York. Also, I want to live in a world that is mostly honest, good, trustworthy, etc.
To me, that starts with me, and each individual. Together that makes a society if we all have some sort of thought on how we treat one another. Its called civility.
It does us no good to say that we cannot obtain knowledge. We simply must say that all knowledge is provisional, and potentially flawed, and as such, the best method for obtaining knowledge is one of strict guidelines, like science. Science is the best knowledge we have.
Science says, there is no universal morality, observation of reality says this also.
Imagination and fantasy say there is.
Which form is a better method of obtaining knowledge? One is highly provisional and based on other knowledge, and the other is just a matter of confabulation.
It's seeming to me that you are completely misconstruing the term "nihilism".
According to wikipedia on nihilism, there are many traits that refer to you, and therefore it seems a little odd that you keep labelling others as nihilist.
according to wikipedia on nihilism, here are some aspects that seem to apply to you:
--"...it was first introduced into philosophical discourse by Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi ... who used the term to characterize rationalism"
--"Nietzsche characterized nihilism as emptying the world and especially human existence of meaning, purpose, comprehensible truth, or essential value."
--"Nihilists generally assert some or all of the following: there is no reasonable proof of the existence of a higher ruler or creator, a "true morality" does not exist"
--"the most common type of nihilism tends toward defeatism or fatalism"
Seriously! The most common type tends towards fatalism!?!?! (edit: according to wikipedia, here is a glimpse into fatalism:. the idea "that there is no free will, and everything including human actions, could only have happened as it did. This version of fatalism is very similar to determinism" !!! )
FinsburyParkCarrots posts a video urging awareness of humility with knowledge, and you call that "nihilism"?? And yet you nearly erase the individual from existence, due to that he/she is merely determined and therefore possesses little "purpose" or "value". Something is seriously being misconstrued here!
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Comments
I don't need to know all about it. Do some reading on brain damage, that should be enough.
There is a class of civility that has survived many ages. If I may call it "class".
The human shmigamoofaloon relies on stimulus. All good thinkers search out new stimuli. Some are more haphazard in that progress than others.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Amazing.
http://www.brainfingers.com/
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
That's like me "proving" Shakespeare was a raving homosexual, based on psycholinguistic analysis of Sonnet 20.
was that an oral sex reference?
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Psycholinguistic. Not cunnilinguistic.
Anyway, I'm off to listen to some mad Chrisjun evangelists on my short wave radio. May as well.
Sorry. I wanted to see your educational superiority prevail over the crudeness of ahnimus's neo-light science.
Language is the bomb.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
No offense ahnimus.
You're quite a thinker.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
There's a forum for this sort of thing, you know.
Anyway, I really am off, now.
Let's see, damage to Broca's area causes something called Broca's aphasia where a person cannot speak or make out words.
Damage to Wernicke's area causes receptive aphasia where a person cannot hear musical sounds, even a water-fall, or knock at their door.
Damage to the angular gyrus causes a person to lose association between sight, sound, touch and so on. They can see a pen, but can't make the association that it is a pen, if they are holding the pen, they don't know that they are holding the same object they are seeing.
Damage to particular halves of the brain can result in some strange disassociations where the subject thinks half of their body belongs to someone else.
Cortical blindness, which is damage to the visual cortex, also known as Anton-Babinksi syndrome, causes a person to not be able to see, but their brain confabulates, so they think they can see, they don't know that they can't see.
Damage to the frontal lobe, the executive inhibitory feature of the brain, causes a person to act as if they are uninhibited all the time, kind of like being totally drunk.
Severing the Corpus Callosum, the fibre that connects the two hemispheres, causes a person to split in two. There are essentially two people controlling opposite sides of the body. It's also called Split-Brain and includes a Split-Consciousness.
Damage to the anterior cingulate sulcus in either hemisphere removes any sense of authorship (Free-will) over the thoughts, emotions, and actions of the opposite side of the body/brain.
Look it all up, or check out Brain-Mind.com and the Brain-Mind lectures on video.google
$2,100 USD Nice!
I want a Mindspa too. http://www.avstim.com
And that's all...what it is.
Neo-light science...
i meant for the wonder (and dogmatic assurance) you are still experiencing at all the new knowledge you have been taking in this past year. there is a balance in aquiring knowledge, yet not becoming "Knowledge." You know?
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Hehe, I've watched a video about Carl Sagan's The Demon-Haunted World that was about fact-memorizing vs imagination. You need both and I have both. I imagine some facts before I ever learn about them. What I don't do is claim they are facts until I've learned about them.
Everyone probably does that.
Some people are kind of enthusiastic about it, if ya know what i mean.
Um, facts are kind of shit. Knowledge is power, sure, but limited knowledge is a curse. I mean, education as you know, is more than just facts, and greater still is that education is about a multitude of things.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/distance/montaigne/back4.html
At least he had a better hairstyle than Sue Blackmore.
-my ex-girlfriend, a year after our depressing break-up - 1991
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
just don't get nihilistic on me like Fins. Up is left and left is down, we've no idea what's going round, we speak can't right, cause ain't no thing, knowledge is soup and spin is fling.
Fins did that?
Hmm. He's literature-English-language oriented, so I guess... He likes to have his fun.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
"Immanuel Kant was a real pissant,
who was very rarely stable,
I degga, Idegga was a boozy beggar
who could drinnk you under the table
etc etc "
Actually, "neo-light science" is not a bad descriptor of your dalliance with knowledge and study. Kinda like "new-age" desribes a flirtation with wisdom without ever actually getting it quite right.
In your list above there are a bunch of facts and some "close but not close enough" gross misunderstandings, which demonstarte your "lite" approach to knowledge acquisition. I have pointed out several important errors to you in teh past, but you usually ignore that.
You could spend the rest of your life in a library containing enough information about how to build teh Sydney Harbour Bridge, and still not know how to build that bridge.
Acquisition of datum pieces is not the same as acquisition of knowldege.
On thread, I am glad I lacjk the type of moral which might allow me to be hateful, judgemental, to kill my own family member in sacrifice or to restore family honor, to stone a woman, to burn withches at the stake or just to be a petty small minded sanctimonius prick.
I'd rather be the half-decent athiest that I am thanks.
I think you will have to assume for the most part that what I'm saying has weight to it, but the exact details might be off, I provided the source for my knowledge and you are more then welcome to learn about it yourself.
This brings us to memory. You seem to be Brain savvy. So you know how the brain organizes memories and how memories can be lost or vague. I can explain a lot of things perfectly and other things I do have to confabulate. Confabulation is a natural part of human life. You know what a Hopfield network is, so I won't bother explaining it. However, you also know that damage to a number of the nodes requires some degree of confabulation. I don't mean in the sense of making stuff up. The basic theory does no depend on the specifics of brain damage only that brain damage exists. I'd be more than happy for you to humor me with your great knowledge in this subject. I know how memory works and I know the more I read it and talk about it, the better I will know it.
Anyway, I'm not being a prick. That is you confabulating.
See, that is he difference between "heavy scince" and "lite science". Heavy science pays atetntion to the details.
Scientists don't indulge in confabulation, that's a new-age or pseudo-science trait.
Memory is interesting, we remember best that which is crucial to our survival.
Memory is subject to contamination because we re-arange mameories during the process of reasoning, and we tell oureselves things we want to know, and "create" memories at times.
An animal like a horse does neither of these things, and their memory is much more robust and less subject to contamination than ours.
I have no desire to educate you, nor do I profess a "great knowledge", indeed much less than you do. My neuro-anatomy was never top notch, but I know enough to identify several errors on your list. I am way beyond having a need to add to my basic life-science knowledge base, I am way more interested in playing guitar.
The prick reference was clearly not to you or anybody on this board. It was a reference to my idea of a narrow-minded right-wimg religious nutter of the type who might say that I have no morals because I am an athiest.
If you're a chick, can you PM me?
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
i was having a conversation with a friend who is a believer, on our daily walk this morning. 'you think about it', she said,' why would people bother to get up in the morning if there was no God and no afterlife. what would there be to live for?'
oh heck i don't know perhaps the life they have NOW, not one promised to them AFTER they're dead.
what's the point in living a life where the reward is eternal life in heaven? who the fuck wants to live forever. and why do you think we should anyway? how arrogant is Mankind to think that he is deserving of such a thing over all the other creatures. creatures who live to survive. Man is the most destructive force on this Earth and he feels somehow, that is deserving of a reward after death. if i were God i'd tell the lot of us, as a species we blew it and there is no place for us in his heaven. that is of course, if i were a believer .
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I suppose if I did pay attention to the detail you would have a decent rebuttal?
I'm interested in hearing which points were wrong. I'll give you that to some degree it might be inaccurate, but you haven't said where and I question how certain you are that they are actually wrong. Furthermore how minor nuances affect the over truth that humans are merely patterns in the fabric of matter. If the pattern is disrupted then the human no longer exists.
SELF-DECEPTION AND CONFABULATION
Dr: "Give me your left hand!" (The patient presents the right hand. The doctor takes hold of the right hand.)
Dr: "Give me your left hand!" (The patient looked puzzled and did not move.)
Dr: "Is there anything wrong with your left hand?"
Pt: "No, doctor."
Dr. "Why don't you move it, then?" (The left hand was held before her eyes.)
Pt.: "I don't know."
Dr: "Is this your hand?"
Pt: "Not mine, doctor."
Dr: "Whose hand is it, then?"
Pt: "I supposed it's yours, doctor."
Dr: "No, it's not. I've already got two hands. Look at it carefully."
Pt. "It is not mine, doctor."
Dr: "Yes it is, look at that ring; whose ring is it?"
Pt.: "That's my ring; you've got my ring, doctor."
Dr: "Look at it--it is your hand.
Pt: "Oh, no doctor."
Dr: "Where is your left hand then?"
Pt: "Somewhere here, I think." (Making groping movements near her left shoulder.) (Adapted from Sandifer, 1946).
It can be said that a person has lied when he or she knowingly possesses the truth yet consciously attempts to deceive another person. However, it sometimes happens that a person half persuades themselves that the lie they have told is true and then behaves accordingly. In these instances it can be said that they have engaged in self-deception (Joseph, 1982, 1986, 1988).
Self deception is not uncommon among men and women, due in part to the manner in which the brain and mind are organized. That is, the language dominant left hemisphere is often unable to fully verbally comprehend or gain complete verbal access to non-veral and emotional impulses and non-linguistic knowledge sources, including memories, stored or generated in the right half of the brain or limbic system. Some impulses may also be partially or fully inhibited before reaching the language dominant left hemisphere by the frontal lobes (Joseph, 1999).
http://brainmind.com/ConfabulationDenial.html
You are inferring or assuming that I am "rebutting" for teh sake of it. If youn insist on basing your arguments on scientific facts, you need to pay attention to detail.
I am disinclined to discuss specifics because that would be off topic (as well as boring and not of interest to me), just as your whole post was initially, as was your presentation of the 'whose hand is it really" story.
I am familiar with the "baffle em with bullshit" approach, and am unimpressed. As I would say to an examinee who gave me that, "very nice, now answer the question".
For someone given to bitching to mods about thread integrity, you don't seem to have any issues with hijacking when it suits you.
This is an off-topic pile of ordure !!
I am agnostic, leaning more towards atheist. I have values and morals. Mine stem from the kind of world I wish to live in. I am smart enough to know that if we did not abide by some kind of value/moral driven behavior, we would live in a world that would be a scene out of the movie, Escape From New York. Also, I want to live in a world that is mostly honest, good, trustworthy, etc.
To me, that starts with me, and each individual. Together that makes a society if we all have some sort of thought on how we treat one another. Its called civility.
According to wikipedia on nihilism, there are many traits that refer to you, and therefore it seems a little odd that you keep labelling others as nihilist.
according to wikipedia on nihilism, here are some aspects that seem to apply to you:
--"...it was first introduced into philosophical discourse by Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi ... who used the term to characterize rationalism"
--"Nietzsche characterized nihilism as emptying the world and especially human existence of meaning, purpose, comprehensible truth, or essential value."
--"Nihilists generally assert some or all of the following: there is no reasonable proof of the existence of a higher ruler or creator, a "true morality" does not exist"
--"the most common type of nihilism tends toward defeatism or fatalism"
Seriously! The most common type tends towards fatalism!?!?! (edit: according to wikipedia, here is a glimpse into fatalism:. the idea "that there is no free will, and everything including human actions, could only have happened as it did. This version of fatalism is very similar to determinism" !!! )
FinsburyParkCarrots posts a video urging awareness of humility with knowledge, and you call that "nihilism"?? And yet you nearly erase the individual from existence, due to that he/she is merely determined and therefore possesses little "purpose" or "value". Something is seriously being misconstrued here!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!