I by no means am innocent. I learn the hard way like everyone else.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
In my view, evolution is a process. Where does this process start and finish?
Intelligence is connected to patterns. When patterns develop, I see intelligence in existence.
evolution starts where and when it is required for survival. and when the opportunity and right conditions arise.
where does evolution end? it doesn't. not until the conditions in which it would occur are terminated. then one cycle of evolution ends and another manifests itself at a later date.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
evolution starts where and when it is required for survival. and when the opportunity and right conditions arise.
where does evolution end? it doesn't. not until the conditions in which it would occur are terminated. then one cycle of evolution ends and another manifests itself at a later date.
We should get high together....
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
The ADIOS project addresses the problem, fundamental to linguistics, bioinformatics and certain other disciplines, of using corpora of raw symbolic sequential data to infer underlying rules that govern their production. Given a corpus of strings (such as text, transcribed speech, nucleotide base pairs, amino acid sequence data, musical notation, etc.), our unsupervised algorithm recursively distills from it hierarchically structured patterns. The ADIOS (Automatic DIstillation of Structure) algorithm relies on a statistical method for pattern extraction (The MEX algorithm) and on structured generalization, two processes that have been implicated in language acquisition. It has been evaluated on artificial context-free grammars with thousands of rules, on natural languages as diverse as English and Chinese, on coding regions in DNA sequences, and on protein data correlating sequence with function. This is the first time an unsupervised algorithm is shown capable of learning complex syntax, generating grammatical novel sentences, scoring well in standard language proficiency tests, and proving useful in other fields that call for structure discovery from raw data, such as bioinformatics
This is basically what human intelligence is. An algorithm for pattern recognition. I'm willing to bet this program run on a cellphone processor would smoke the human capacity. Of course, we have a lot of threads, otherwise our 10^14 ops would probably win. Although as far as hardware is concerned, the human brain probably has several "processors" dedicated to different functions, many more bridges and a faster bus speed. Then again, we are bottlenecked at the nerve cells, they only fire at 500 hz.
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
The ADIOS project addresses the problem, fundamental to linguistics, bioinformatics and certain other disciplines, of using corpora of raw symbolic sequential data to infer underlying rules that govern their production. Given a corpus of strings (such as text, transcribed speech, nucleotide base pairs, amino acid sequence data, musical notation, etc.), our unsupervised algorithm recursively distills from it hierarchically structured patterns. The ADIOS (Automatic DIstillation of Structure) algorithm relies on a statistical method for pattern extraction (The MEX algorithm) and on structured generalization, two processes that have been implicated in language acquisition. It has been evaluated on artificial context-free grammars with thousands of rules, on natural languages as diverse as English and Chinese, on coding regions in DNA sequences, and on protein data correlating sequence with function. This is the first time an unsupervised algorithm is shown capable of learning complex syntax, generating grammatical novel sentences, scoring well in standard language proficiency tests, and proving useful in other fields that call for structure discovery from raw data, such as bioinformatics
This is basically what human intelligence is. An algorithm for pattern recognition. I'm willing to bet this program run on a cellphone processor would smoke the human capacity. Of course, we have a lot of threads, otherwise our 10^14 ops would probably win. Although as far as hardware is concerned, the human brain probably has several "processors" dedicated to different functions, many more bridges and a faster bus speed. Then again, we are bottlenecked at the nerve cells, they only fire at 500 hz.
Dude...that is seriously fkucing hardcore.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
evolution starts where and when it is required for survival. and when the opportunity and right conditions arise.
where does evolution end? it doesn't. not until the conditions in which it would occur are terminated. then one cycle of evolution ends and another manifests itself at a later date.
So evolution was somehow coded to arise when the right conditions arise?
When certain variables come into play? Again, to me patterns are intelligent. Particularly purposeful patterns.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
The ADIOS project addresses the problem, fundamental to linguistics, bioinformatics and certain other disciplines, of using corpora of raw symbolic sequential data to infer underlying rules that govern their production. Given a corpus of strings (such as text, transcribed speech, nucleotide base pairs, amino acid sequence data, musical notation, etc.), our unsupervised algorithm recursively distills from it hierarchically structured patterns. The ADIOS (Automatic DIstillation of Structure) algorithm relies on a statistical method for pattern extraction (The MEX algorithm) and on structured generalization, two processes that have been implicated in language acquisition. It has been evaluated on artificial context-free grammars with thousands of rules, on natural languages as diverse as English and Chinese, on coding regions in DNA sequences, and on protein data correlating sequence with function. This is the first time an unsupervised algorithm is shown capable of learning complex syntax, generating grammatical novel sentences, scoring well in standard language proficiency tests, and proving useful in other fields that call for structure discovery from raw data, such as bioinformatics
This is basically what human intelligence is. An algorithm for pattern recognition. I'm willing to bet this program run on a cellphone processor would smoke the human capacity. Of course, we have a lot of threads, otherwise our 10^14 ops would probably win. Although as far as hardware is concerned, the human brain probably has several "processors" dedicated to different functions, many more bridges and a faster bus speed. Then again, we are bottlenecked at the nerve cells, they only fire at 500 hz.
If an "algorithm is this (as per the dictionary):
"A step-by-step problem-solving procedure, especially an established, recursive computational procedure for solving a problem in a finite number of steps."
...that sounds very intelligent and "designed" to me. So human intelligence, by your view sounds very intelligent, complex, and meaningfully patterned to me. I wonder how it got "programmed".
The bottom line is that nothing just spontaneously arose of its own accord. Everything operates by invisible universal laws and we all know this. I realize to break any part of the complex universe down, we like to think we understand it. And some of us certainly understand our theories of it. So, we break it down and try to make sense of it. The problem with such views is that people are missing huge gaps of knowledge, and therefore don't get the big picture. And it shows.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
"A step-by-step problem-solving procedure, especially an established, recursive computational procedure for solving a problem in a finite number of steps."
...that sounds very intelligent and "designed" to me. So human intelligence, by your view sounds very intelligent, complex, and meaningfully patterned to me. I wonder how it got "programmed".
The bottom line is that nothing just spontaneously arose of its own accord. Everything operates by invisible universal laws and we all know this. I realize to break any part of the complex universe down, we like to think we understand it. And some of us certainly understand our theories of it. So, we break it down and try to make sense of it. The problem with such views is that people are missing huge gaps of knowledge, and therefore don't get the big picture. And it shows.
It was programmed by evolution.
Missing huge gaps of knowledge. Is it that huge gaps of knowledge that are only knowable to those in "the know" otherwise they won't know. Is somebody hoarding evidence?
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
Truth is the most powerful force in the universe. If it wasn't, then so many people wouldn't be afraid of it. I think even the most devout worshippers of deities fear truth even more than they fear that which they overtly worship.
It's absurd that practitioners of faith take it upon themselves to lecture me about life and morality when they probably can't go a single day without telling a lie of some kind.
I have yet to see any spiritual doctrine that covers why it's important to refrain from dishonesty other than that it's against the will of god. A few months back I was watching Pat Robertson answer a viewer question about why it's important to tell the truth. His explanation was that if you don't tell the truth, then other people will not be able to trust you, and you are therefore no longer be a person of your word. He goes on to say, "It's important that people can rely on you to be a person who is true to his word."
By that rationale, it's OK to lie as long as people don't find out about it. It's an obviously shallow and extrinsic stance on the importance of truthfulness. For those of you who are unfamiliar with maslow, extrinsic motivations are those that are derived from outside influences, not from within. They're considered to be low on the scale of personal development.
I admit that I lie sometimes. I do it for job and financial security. I wish I didn't have to, but I really do see it as the only way to survive right now. I think that if I had the opportunity to be honest all of the time for an extended period of time, I would be free to develop a heightened sense of awareness that no religion could even come close to rivaling.
That's one of the main reasons why I enjoy message boards. I can be honest here and not have to fear any sort of reprisal.
The ability to be honest with yourself and others sounds simple and remedial, yet if I had to guess, I'd say maybe less than one half of a percent of the population have mastered it - if that.
So, unless it can be proven that spirituality is a pre-requisite for possessing the ability to be honest, then I have no reason to believe that spirituality has anything to do with morality.
Missing huge gaps of knowledge. Is it that huge gaps of knowledge that are only knowable to those in "the know" otherwise they won't know. Is somebody hoarding evidence?
Get back to me when you understand all of the forces in the universe.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Truth is the most powerful force in the universe. If it wasn't, then so many people wouldn't be afraid of it. I think even the most devout worshippers of deities fear truth even more than they fear that which they overtly worship.
It's absurd that practitioners of faith take it upon themselves to lecture me about life and morality when they probably can't go a single day without telling a lie of some kind.
I have yet to see any spiritual doctrine that covers why it's important to refrain from dishonesty other than that it's against the will of god. A few months back I was watching Pat Robertson answer a viewer question about why it's important to tell the truth. His explanation was that if you don't tell the truth, then other people will not be able to trust you, and you are therefore no longer be a person of your word. He goes on to say, "It's important that people can rely on you to be a person who is true to his word."
By that rationale, it's OK to lie as long as people don't find out about it. It's an obviously shallow and extrinsic stance on the importance of truthfulness. For those of you who are unfamiliar with maslow, extrinsic motivations are those that are derived from outside influences, not from within. They're considered to be low on the scale of personal development.
I admit that I lie sometimes. I do it for job and financial security. I wish I didn't have to, but I really do see it as the only way to survive right now. I think that if I had the opportunity to be honest all of the time for an extended period of time, I would be free to develop a heightened sense of awareness that no religion could even come close to rivaling.
That's one of the main reasons why I enjoy message boards. I can be honest here and not have to fear any sort of reprisal.
The ability to be honest with yourself and others sounds simple and remedial, yet if I had to guess, I'd say maybe less than one half of a percent of the population have mastered it - if that.
So, unless it can be proven that spirituality is a pre-requisite for possessing the ability to be honest, then I have no reason to believe that spirituality has anything to do with morality.
Belief is much more powerful than truth. Or maybe Bush would not have ocnvinced everyone to go to Iraq.
As for "most powerful force in teh Univers", I think gravity flogs em both.
Evolution is a programmer? I think of programmers as intelligent.
Is evolution the universal law of all? Does it encompass every other universal law?
It's a probable cause. Think about. The universe is finely tuned. So are species. But the universe is chaotic at every level. This chaos creates an array of potentials. But unless the combination succeeds, it fails. From before the hydrogen atoms fusion up to and beyond the ascent of humans. Order out of Chaos.
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
It's a probable cause. Think about. The universe is finely tuned. So are species. But the universe is chaotic at every level. This chaos creates an array of potentials. But unless the combination succeeds, it fails. From before the hydrogen atoms fusion up to and beyond the ascent of humans. Order out of Chaos.
Are you talking about all of reality? Or are you only talking about what science knows about?
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Belief is much more powerful than truth. Or maybe Bush would not have ocnvinced everyone to go to Iraq.
As for "most powerful force in teh Univers", I think gravity flogs em both.
Had the truth been known, the war would not have happened. Therefore, truth is more powerful in that instance, it's just that truth was obscured by lies. If you want to refer to lies as being more powerful than truth because it can obscure truth, then you might as well refer to clouds as being more powerful than the sun. So, the example of Bush and Iraq does not support your assertion that belief is more power than truth.
I refer to when people break any concept down, and create an illusory vacuum. The vacuum does not exist, and by taking any context out of the whole, there are the huge gaps of knowledge that are contained in the whole of the universe that have been excluded for the one context. Then assumptions are made that such tidbits of information are the truth. IF a kernal of "truth" can even be gleaned from that which has been understood in the illusory conditions of an imagined vacuum, it would reamins a mere kernal of truth.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Had the truth been known, the war would not have happened. Therefore, truth is more powerful in that instance, it's just that truth was obscured by lies. If you want to refer to lies as being more powerful than truth because it can obscure truth, then you might as well refer to clouds as being more powerful than the sun. So, the example of Bush and Iraq does not support your assertion that belief is more power than truth.
Truth was overpowered by belief, not obscured. Reason is so often overpowered by belief.
Truth gets fucked over more times than not, so it does not exert much power at all.
and gravity still wins
Truth was overpowered by belief, not obscured. Reason is so often overpowered by belief.
Truth gets fucked over more times than not, so it does not exert much power at all.
and gravity still wins
Truth reigns at all times. Where we find conflict, blindness and misunderstanding is in human perception of "what IS" or the Truth. It doesn't change the facts, however, as you mentioned...universal laws are still in absolute perfect working order, whether we overlook, ignore, malign or misunderstand them.
In psychology, it's understood that the conflicts humans have with what they see are within. We may project those conflicts outwards, and even act them out, yet they are conflicts of the human psyche, not conflicts of natural universal laws which operate....perfectly. And considering humans operate within such perfect natural universal laws, and not at all without, that makes such human conflict perfect, within the context of the universe. Whether we understand it or not.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
The universe is finely tuned. So are species. But the universe is chaotic at every level. This chaos creates an array of potentials. But unless the combination succeeds, it fails.
Can I ask you what you mean by a combination "succeeding"? Or "failing"? Are you saying that there is an underlying purpose that is looking to be met in such interactions? Are you saying evolution is a mechanism serving a purpose? It looks like when you talk of the human brain being so complexly programmed by evolution, you are talking about evolution serving a "purpose" and further you are talking of it succeeding or failing such purpose. What is the purpose that lies outside of evolution itself, that evolution succeeds or fails at? What is this that evolution is a mechanism of?
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
But evolution doesn't just follow a pattern. There's a whole host of completely random mutations to take into account.
There's very clearly some distinct universal patterns of "evolution" or we wouldn't study them, talk about or teach them.
Take a look at this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALZky9sW59M
It's a few minutes long and addresses quite pertinently our human perception regarding this topic, in terms of how we process information and specifically randomness and patterns and how they operate.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
So, to tie the video in to what I am saying, and grounding it in science: while we are able to perceive the physical dimensions of height, width, depth, time and space, who on this board can understand, intepret, explain and take into consideration the other 7 dimensions identified in quantum physics?
Because we are unable to perceive, conceptualize or understand them, does that mean they don't exist?
If we are being scientific, we cannot assess that what we see is not intelligent. That is judgment and it is beyond the facts. And such perception identifies our own level of awareness/lack-of-awareness, which again brings me back to the afore-mentioned "huge gaps of awareness" we operate upon.
Those who have an accurate understanding of science, and who are truly not acting on bias, understand that science does not answer the questions of "why". Science does not address that which is beyond the facts. It cannot. This point defines the limits of science, not the reality of what "is".
Onward with humility and the glorious discovery of un-understood and uncharted dimensions of reality!
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Truth was overpowered by belief, not obscured. Reason is so often overpowered by belief.
Truth gets fucked over more times than not, so it does not exert much power at all.
and gravity still wins
"Overpowered" implies a total victory. In the case of Bush and Iraq, the truth eventually reared its head and created a political backlash that Bush and possibly the US will never recover from.
Therefore, truth was not and never is "overpowered" by belief. It is instead obscured.
So, to tie the video in to what I am saying, and grounding it in science: while we are able to perceive the physical dimensions of height, width, depth, time and space, who on this board can understand, intepret, explain and take into consideration the other 7 dimensions identified in quantum physics?
Because we are unable to perceive, conceptualize or understand them, does that mean they don't exist?
If we are being scientific, we cannot assess that what we see is not intelligent. That is judgment and it is beyond the facts. And such perception identifies our own level of awareness/lack-of-awareness, which again brings me back to the afore-mentioned "huge gaps of awareness" we operate upon.
Those who have an accurate understanding of science, and who are truly not acting on bias, understand that science does not answer the questions of "why". Science does not address that which is beyond the facts. It cannot. This point defines the limits of science, not the reality of what "is".
Onward with humility and the glorious discovery of un-understood and uncharted dimensions of reality!
This I agree with, completely. Science isn't about why, it's about how. Anything beyond is speculation based on our own perceptions. But that's why I'm not prepared to say evolution is intelligent. For me, assigning intelligence to evolution is giving it a "why" that can't be proven.
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
This I agree with, completely. Science isn't about why, it's about how. Anything beyond is speculation based on our own perceptions. But that's why I'm not prepared to say evolution is intelligent. For me, assigning intelligence to evolution is giving it a "why" that can't be proven.
Going by your own impressions is absolutely fair.
For me, where intelligence exists, and I see it stunningly all around me from the tiniest particle to the most complex theory, it is intelligence, itself. It's self evident.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
How is natural selection predetermined in our brains?
I knew when I wrote this I'd hve to explain it. What made sense to me during a lecture was that we have images of beauty (e.g. physical built, facial features as symmetry), fitness and health for a future partner are present in our brains, trades we seek for in the person we eventually share genes with for a future generation. This (in short and what I concluded from it) is the explanation of a professor of mine who teaches evolution. In the course of evolution this partner picking is programmed in the brain.
Added: I guess in the human brain and the times and social circumstances we live in this might have changed somewhat, but still have a blueprint present.
I knew when I wrote this I'd hve to explain it. What made sense to me during a lecture was that we have images of beauty (e.g. physical built, facial features as symmetry), fitness and health for a future partner are present in our brains, trades we seek for in the person we eventually share genes with for a future generation. This (in short and what I concluded from it) is the explanation of a professor of mine who teaches evolution. In the course of evolution this partner picking is programmed in the brain.
Added: I guess in the human brain and the times and social circumstances we live in this might have changed somewhat, but still have a blueprint present.
I would even go so far as to say this encoding comes from existence/life and moves through and even beyond the brain. It obviously goes beyond the brain when it brings an individual mate into the picture. It's a holistic function. This is where the "beginnings" and endings and compartmentalizations are only meant for study, and do not define reality. Reality defines reality. I agree with the essence of what you are saying, and I see it in a more encompassing way.
I'm mesmerized by how this works out on the internet--how I tap into certain people who are in a similar place as I am, from all over the globe. The limits we once liked to entertain are dissolving, and we are understanding the holism of what Is. To me it's stunning in its depth and intelligence.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Comments
In my view, evolution is a process. Where does this process start and finish?
Intelligence is connected to patterns. When patterns develop, I see intelligence in existence.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Computer = garbage in = garbage out
I by no means am innocent. I learn the hard way like everyone else.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
evolution starts where and when it is required for survival. and when the opportunity and right conditions arise.
where does evolution end? it doesn't. not until the conditions in which it would occur are terminated. then one cycle of evolution ends and another manifests itself at a later date.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
We should get high together....
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
The ADIOS project addresses the problem, fundamental to linguistics, bioinformatics and certain other disciplines, of using corpora of raw symbolic sequential data to infer underlying rules that govern their production. Given a corpus of strings (such as text, transcribed speech, nucleotide base pairs, amino acid sequence data, musical notation, etc.), our unsupervised algorithm recursively distills from it hierarchically structured patterns. The ADIOS (Automatic DIstillation of Structure) algorithm relies on a statistical method for pattern extraction (The MEX algorithm) and on structured generalization, two processes that have been implicated in language acquisition. It has been evaluated on artificial context-free grammars with thousands of rules, on natural languages as diverse as English and Chinese, on coding regions in DNA sequences, and on protein data correlating sequence with function. This is the first time an unsupervised algorithm is shown capable of learning complex syntax, generating grammatical novel sentences, scoring well in standard language proficiency tests, and proving useful in other fields that call for structure discovery from raw data, such as bioinformatics
http://adios.tau.ac.il/
This is basically what human intelligence is. An algorithm for pattern recognition. I'm willing to bet this program run on a cellphone processor would smoke the human capacity. Of course, we have a lot of threads, otherwise our 10^14 ops would probably win. Although as far as hardware is concerned, the human brain probably has several "processors" dedicated to different functions, many more bridges and a faster bus speed. Then again, we are bottlenecked at the nerve cells, they only fire at 500 hz.
Dude...that is seriously fkucing hardcore.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
When certain variables come into play? Again, to me patterns are intelligent. Particularly purposeful patterns.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
anytime.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
If an "algorithm is this (as per the dictionary):
"A step-by-step problem-solving procedure, especially an established, recursive computational procedure for solving a problem in a finite number of steps."
...that sounds very intelligent and "designed" to me. So human intelligence, by your view sounds very intelligent, complex, and meaningfully patterned to me. I wonder how it got "programmed".
The bottom line is that nothing just spontaneously arose of its own accord. Everything operates by invisible universal laws and we all know this. I realize to break any part of the complex universe down, we like to think we understand it. And some of us certainly understand our theories of it. So, we break it down and try to make sense of it. The problem with such views is that people are missing huge gaps of knowledge, and therefore don't get the big picture. And it shows.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
It was programmed by evolution.
Missing huge gaps of knowledge. Is it that huge gaps of knowledge that are only knowable to those in "the know" otherwise they won't know. Is somebody hoarding evidence?
It's absurd that practitioners of faith take it upon themselves to lecture me about life and morality when they probably can't go a single day without telling a lie of some kind.
I have yet to see any spiritual doctrine that covers why it's important to refrain from dishonesty other than that it's against the will of god. A few months back I was watching Pat Robertson answer a viewer question about why it's important to tell the truth. His explanation was that if you don't tell the truth, then other people will not be able to trust you, and you are therefore no longer be a person of your word. He goes on to say, "It's important that people can rely on you to be a person who is true to his word."
By that rationale, it's OK to lie as long as people don't find out about it. It's an obviously shallow and extrinsic stance on the importance of truthfulness. For those of you who are unfamiliar with maslow, extrinsic motivations are those that are derived from outside influences, not from within. They're considered to be low on the scale of personal development.
I admit that I lie sometimes. I do it for job and financial security. I wish I didn't have to, but I really do see it as the only way to survive right now. I think that if I had the opportunity to be honest all of the time for an extended period of time, I would be free to develop a heightened sense of awareness that no religion could even come close to rivaling.
That's one of the main reasons why I enjoy message boards. I can be honest here and not have to fear any sort of reprisal.
The ability to be honest with yourself and others sounds simple and remedial, yet if I had to guess, I'd say maybe less than one half of a percent of the population have mastered it - if that.
So, unless it can be proven that spirituality is a pre-requisite for possessing the ability to be honest, then I have no reason to believe that spirituality has anything to do with morality.
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=272825
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Is evolution the universal law of all? Does it encompass every other universal law?
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Belief is much more powerful than truth. Or maybe Bush would not have ocnvinced everyone to go to Iraq.
As for "most powerful force in teh Univers", I think gravity flogs em both.
It's a probable cause. Think about. The universe is finely tuned. So are species. But the universe is chaotic at every level. This chaos creates an array of potentials. But unless the combination succeeds, it fails. From before the hydrogen atoms fusion up to and beyond the ascent of humans. Order out of Chaos.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Describe to me these "huge gaps" you speak of.
Had the truth been known, the war would not have happened. Therefore, truth is more powerful in that instance, it's just that truth was obscured by lies. If you want to refer to lies as being more powerful than truth because it can obscure truth, then you might as well refer to clouds as being more powerful than the sun. So, the example of Bush and Iraq does not support your assertion that belief is more power than truth.
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=272825
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Truth was overpowered by belief, not obscured. Reason is so often overpowered by belief.
Truth gets fucked over more times than not, so it does not exert much power at all.
and gravity still wins
In psychology, it's understood that the conflicts humans have with what they see are within. We may project those conflicts outwards, and even act them out, yet they are conflicts of the human psyche, not conflicts of natural universal laws which operate....perfectly. And considering humans operate within such perfect natural universal laws, and not at all without, that makes such human conflict perfect, within the context of the universe. Whether we understand it or not.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
But evolution doesn't just follow a pattern. There's a whole host of completely random mutations to take into account.
Take a look at this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALZky9sW59M
It's a few minutes long and addresses quite pertinently our human perception regarding this topic, in terms of how we process information and specifically randomness and patterns and how they operate.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Because we are unable to perceive, conceptualize or understand them, does that mean they don't exist?
If we are being scientific, we cannot assess that what we see is not intelligent. That is judgment and it is beyond the facts. And such perception identifies our own level of awareness/lack-of-awareness, which again brings me back to the afore-mentioned "huge gaps of awareness" we operate upon.
Those who have an accurate understanding of science, and who are truly not acting on bias, understand that science does not answer the questions of "why". Science does not address that which is beyond the facts. It cannot. This point defines the limits of science, not the reality of what "is".
Onward with humility and the glorious discovery of un-understood and uncharted dimensions of reality!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
"Overpowered" implies a total victory. In the case of Bush and Iraq, the truth eventually reared its head and created a political backlash that Bush and possibly the US will never recover from.
Therefore, truth was not and never is "overpowered" by belief. It is instead obscured.
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=272825
This I agree with, completely. Science isn't about why, it's about how. Anything beyond is speculation based on our own perceptions. But that's why I'm not prepared to say evolution is intelligent. For me, assigning intelligence to evolution is giving it a "why" that can't be proven.
For me, where intelligence exists, and I see it stunningly all around me from the tiniest particle to the most complex theory, it is intelligence, itself. It's self evident.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Added: I guess in the human brain and the times and social circumstances we live in this might have changed somewhat, but still have a blueprint present.
I'm mesmerized by how this works out on the internet--how I tap into certain people who are in a similar place as I am, from all over the globe. The limits we once liked to entertain are dissolving, and we are understanding the holism of what Is. To me it's stunning in its depth and intelligence.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!