I know everyone has a right to speak what they want. I agree. I'm a strong supporter of that.
I guess I mean within this context of this debate/discussion/argument... Most everyone has a claim etc. and supports it... I guess I just feel there is nothing contributed to the progression of "understanding" or the progression of the debate when someone makes claims then backs it up with "I get it... you just can't comprehend it". I don't understand about 60% of the things said in here but many of the science "opinions" provide links etc. so I can at least ATTEMPT to read and understand.
Maybe I just don't like people making claims they can't even BEGIN to provide ANY evidence for. (I don't count "I had an experience, you just don't get it" as evidence.)
Also, while some people are more adept at understanding calculus or physics MUCH better than others, I still believe (short of mental retardation/disability etc.) that ANYONE can learn the sciences if they put enough time into it and are committed to it.
Anyways, I usually just lurk around and take it all in. I only comment when something strikes me. Please everyone, continue the discussion.
Yeah, I see what you are saying scw. I guess having watched OLS and Ahnimus bash it out for quite some time over many months and threads, I can understand that the comment was probably more of a personal one based on exhaustion, more than any arrogance or condescention. Although could be!!! They have been at this for a while!! I do think it was a personal comment though and not directed at the world and "unbelievers" in general.
Anyway, plenty of people with mental and physical disabilities can understand science way better than I ever will. And I'm ok with that. I can and do read and attempt to understand as much as I can, but I don't ever kid myself that I'll be a rocket scientist anytime soon!! And why would I want to be? I'd no more study and attempt to grasp the whole of scientific concepts than I would learn the bible, koran or any other religious doctrine by wrote and attempt to grasp it. But I surely do admire those who can and do do both.
I think we need to acknowledge both, all, points of view, and be accepting of them in order to move forward as a race. And I don't worry so much about the delivery or the "facts" or a prescribed way of presenting things as giving them more credence than those things that are intangible, "unexplained" if you like and perhaps lacking in "hard evidence" if you prefer.
We all understand and process information differently. Not right and wrong. Just different.
.......Lost you a little bit here. Especially the last sentence. Isn't this a problem with an atheistic view because its assuming why most people might believe in a higher power or entity. People believe in these things for so many reasons.
Why do most of us need a god? I think for some people it may be to fill a void, or strength? But for others its as clear or real as day. Might not be for an atheist though...
Hope I'm making sense...:)
Made sense to me! Although I think just as to some people god is just as real and clear as day, it equally is as real and clear as day to some people that this isn't the case.
I think some athiests assume, just as some who believe in god assume. Just as some athiests don't assume, same as some who believe in god don't. That's human nature isn't it?
so it was always here and one day; billions of years later; POOF life. ok; go with that if it helps you sleep. you must be young.
How the heck did you get that all so completely backwards? I'm saying the exact opposite.
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.
Excellent post sponger. I agree. I think pretty much as you do. However, for whatever reason, which I cannot explain, or back up with scientific evidence, I cannot deny that I have a spiritual side. And that connection is possible between human beings on levels that I don't think have been adequately explained by science or religion. And I'm happy to take that as "just is" in my case. And I know others do too. And not that this also not the case for others. And it's all good. I certainly welcome the views of all people. And I don't see how someone's belief or not really impacts on my ability to enjoy their company or understand their views. It would be the behaviour that would stop me from wanting to know a person, not their beliefs.
I have a theory of such spirituality.
During synaptogenesis neurons are wired and assigned to certain things. For example, the visual cortex is a group of neurons and synapses wired during synaptogenesis to handle input from the retina. The development of the visual cortex is dependent on input from the retina, if the eyes don't see light, then the visual cortex will not develop during synaptogenesis. So the important thing is to recognize that synaptogenesis depends on input to create these cortexes or groups of neurons, engrams if you like.
Ok, now, I'm going to explain that men and women's brains are different. The reason for this I theorize is linked to synaptogenesis. For example the amygdala is larger in women than in men. Women are expected in western culture to be more emotional, the amygdala is the emotional center of the brain, or the gateway to the limbic system. I think this is a rather circular system, the density or mass of the amygdala is determined during synaptogenesis based on the input from behavioral models, if parents expect or encourage a child to be more emotionally tuned, the mass of the amygdala predictably should be larger. I'd like to see some cross-culture studies of the effect of culture on the development of the amygdala to confirm this theory. It's sort of circular, because this larger amygdala allows a person to be more emotional, or emotions have more influence on decision making. So an adult woman who was subjected to stereotypical western gender models during infant synaptogenesis is over more likely to have greater emotional influence in decision making and to pass this on to her children.
So, then how does this apply to spirituality? A spiritual region of the brain has been identified, it is active during spiritual experiences and so on. It's unclear if atheists have this or not. My theory is that the expectancy of the brain to perform functions complimentary of the construct of spirituality is responsible for a synaptogenic association of neuron allowing for the experience of spirituality. There is no identifiable spirit organ that accepts input from the spiritual world, like an ear collects sound waves, and eyes collect light waves. That's not to say that one might be discovered, but as with light and sound, the experiences we have do not exist in reality as we experience them. They exist as waves of photons or electrons. So it's difficult to interpret the implications of actually having a spirit organ, which is speculation anyway. I think that the spirit brain was created during synaptogenesis to facilitate a social construct, the input is ideas or stories and the brain region produces the feeling that is expected to be associated with it.
That's my theory, and maybe it's nuts, but people thought Nikola Tesla was nuts and he invented Alternating Current A/C, Radio and Wireless amongst many other things, things which we all take for granted now. My theory is an explanation that is quantified and I think makes a lot of sense. You aren't likely to find another theory like this, unless someone has already thought of this, which is probably the case. I come to these ideas on my own, and then I end up finding out they are 2000 years old.
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
During synaptogenesis neurons are wired and assigned to certain things. For example, the visual cortex is a group of neurons and synapses wired during synaptogenesis to handle input from the retina. The development of the visual cortex is dependent on input from the retina, if the eyes don't see light, then the visual cortex will not develop during synaptogenesis. So the important thing is to recognize that synaptogenesis depends on input to create these cortexes or groups of neurons, engrams if you like.
Ok, now, I'm going to explain that men and women's brains are different. The reason for this I theorize is linked to synaptogenesis. For example the amygdala is larger in women than in men. Women are expected in western culture to be more emotional, the amygdala is the emotional center of the brain, or the gateway to the limbic system. I think this is a rather circular system, the density or mass of the amygdala is determined during synaptogenesis based on the input from behavioral models, if parents expect or encourage a child to be more emotionally tuned, the mass of the amygdala predictably should be larger. I'd like to see some cross-culture studies of the effect of culture on the development of the amygdala to confirm this theory. It's sort of circular, because this larger amygdala allows a person to be more emotional, or emotions have more influence on decision making. So an adult woman who was subjected to stereotypical western gender models during infant synaptogenesis is over more likely to have greater emotional influence in decision making and to pass this on to her children.
So, then how does this apply to spirituality? A spiritual region of the brain has been identified, it is active during spiritual experiences and so on. It's unclear if atheists have this or not. My theory is that the expectancy of the brain to perform functions complimentary of the construct of spirituality is responsible for a synaptogenic association of neuron allowing for the experience of spirituality. There is no identifiable spirit organ that accepts input from the spiritual world, like an ear collects sound waves, and eyes collect light waves. That's not to say that one might be discovered, but as with light and sound, the experiences we have do not exist in reality as we experience them. They exist as waves of photons or electrons. So it's difficult to interpret the implications of actually having a spirit organ, which is speculation anyway. I think that the spirit brain was created during synaptogenesis to facilitate a social construct, the input is ideas or stories and the brain region produces the feeling that is expected to be associated with it.
That's my theory, and maybe it's nuts, but people thought Nikola Tesla was nuts and he invented Alternating Current A/C, Radio and Wireless amongst many other things, things which we all take for granted now. My theory is an explanation that is quantified and I think makes a lot of sense. You aren't likely to find another theory like this, unless someone has already thought of this, which is probably the case. I come to these ideas on my own, and then I end up finding out they are 2000 years old.
Don't forget or neglect teh role of testosterone during this process. testosterone shapes men's bodies and minds from an early stage in embryonic development, and continues to do so throughout neonatal and infancy,and indeed our whole lives. Failure of masculinization of the brain occurs sometimes, and you see this quite clearly in many gay men, esp the ones who are unambigously gay rather than equivocally.
Don't forget or neglect teh role of testosterone during this process. testosterone shapes men's bodies and minds from an early stage in embryonic development, and continues to do so throughout neonatal and infancy,and indeed our whole lives. Failure of masculinization of the brain occurs sometimes, and you see this quite clearly in many gay men, esp the ones who are unambigously gay rather than equivocally.
Interesting. Do you think that the failure of masculinity in gay men is neurally correlated and is there any evidence that gay men were raised differently?
I'm not sure if you are aware of Margaret Mead's cross-culture study on gender roles. She found that several tribes in Papua New Guinea had reversed gender roles, and in at least one tribe both men and women filled feminine roles by standards of western culture. In addition another tribe encouraged sexual activity at all ages, children had sex with each other, it was the cultural norm.
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
During synaptogenesis neurons are wired and assigned to certain things. For example, the visual cortex is a group of neurons and synapses wired during synaptogenesis to handle input from the retina. The development of the visual cortex is dependent on input from the retina, if the eyes don't see light, then the visual cortex will not develop during synaptogenesis. So the important thing is to recognize that synaptogenesis depends on input to create these cortexes or groups of neurons, engrams if you like.
Ok, now, I'm going to explain that men and women's brains are different. The reason for this I theorize is linked to synaptogenesis. For example the amygdala is larger in women than in men. Women are expected in western culture to be more emotional, the amygdala is the emotional center of the brain, or the gateway to the limbic system. I think this is a rather circular system, the density or mass of the amygdala is determined during synaptogenesis based on the input from behavioral models, if parents expect or encourage a child to be more emotionally tuned, the mass of the amygdala predictably should be larger. I'd like to see some cross-culture studies of the effect of culture on the development of the amygdala to confirm this theory. It's sort of circular, because this larger amygdala allows a person to be more emotional, or emotions have more influence on decision making. So an adult woman who was subjected to stereotypical western gender models during infant synaptogenesis is over more likely to have greater emotional influence in decision making and to pass this on to her children.
So, then how does this apply to spirituality? A spiritual region of the brain has been identified, it is active during spiritual experiences and so on. It's unclear if atheists have this or not. My theory is that the expectancy of the brain to perform functions complimentary of the construct of spirituality is responsible for a synaptogenic association of neuron allowing for the experience of spirituality. There is no identifiable spirit organ that accepts input from the spiritual world, like an ear collects sound waves, and eyes collect light waves. That's not to say that one might be discovered, but as with light and sound, the experiences we have do not exist in reality as we experience them. They exist as waves of photons or electrons. So it's difficult to interpret the implications of actually having a spirit organ, which is speculation anyway. I think that the spirit brain was created during synaptogenesis to facilitate a social construct, the input is ideas or stories and the brain region produces the feeling that is expected to be associated with it.
That's my theory, and maybe it's nuts, but people thought Nikola Tesla was nuts and he invented Alternating Current A/C, Radio and Wireless amongst many other things, things which we all take for granted now. My theory is an explanation that is quantified and I think makes a lot of sense. You aren't likely to find another theory like this, unless someone has already thought of this, which is probably the case. I come to these ideas on my own, and then I end up finding out they are 2000 years old.
That's really interesting Ahnimus. And I think I even understand it to a degree. Which is nothing short of miraculous!!! I guess you can understand though, why most people don't need these type explainations as to why they are spiritual, they just are. That being as you are is enough for many of us.
Feeling as you do is enough for many of us. And I don't know, perhaps it's my romantiziced feminine upbringing but your explaination does sound very clinical to me. And not really in keeping with the experience of spirituality as I have experienced it. So I'm sure you'll understand if I just go with the feeling and not need the explaination so much. But thanks though, you certainly have given me something to mull over.
That's really interesting Ahnimus. And I think I even understand it to a degree. Which is nothing short of miraculous!!! I guess you can understand though, why most people don't need these type explainations as to why they are spiritual, they just are. That being as you are is enough for many of us.
Feeling as you do is enough for many of us. And I don't know, perhaps it's my romantiziced feminine upbringing but your explaination does sound very clinical to me. And not really in keeping with the experience of spirituality as I have experienced it. So I'm sure you'll understand if I just go with the feeling and not need the explaination so much. But thanks though, you certainly have given me something to mull over.
It's absolutely fascinating how the brain develops. I'd like to obtain an animation or something. I wish I was better with Flash.
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 absolutely fascinating how the brain develops. I'd like to obtain an animation or something. I wish I was better with Flash.
Yes, some of the things that they have discovered since the advent of the MRI and other useful diagnostic tools and the clever way they are employing them to further their research is really very exciting and fascinating and just damn clever!!
Do not get me started on how I wish I was better at all things technological!!
I'm quite sure you'll get the hang of whatever it is you need to utilize to further your thirst for knowledge.
i believe athiests have given up searching for enlightenment. ahnimus preaches more than billy graham. every day he's on here preaching how atheism is the "right" belief. i spent the first 16 years of my life going to church and i've never seen a priest preach as much as he does.
i am an atheist and i have not given up the search for enlightenment.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Interesting. Do you think that the failure of masculinity in gay men is neurally correlated and is there any evidence that gay men were raised differently?
I'm not sure if you are aware of Margaret Mead's cross-culture study on gender roles. She found that several tribes in Papua New Guinea had reversed gender roles, and in at least one tribe both men and women filled feminine roles by standards of western culture. In addition another tribe encouraged sexual activity at all ages, children had sex with each other, it was the cultural norm.
There are two "types" of gay men. ones who are indisputably gay, alwys have been, always will be, and the ones who are not overtly gay intitalliy, and could have "gone either way" There is some evidence that deprivation of male affection during upbringing contributes to those ones becoming gay. There has been a bit of a belief that if a father hugs his son too much, that wil make him gay, but the opposite is more likely to be true.
If you look at eh 2 gay guys on Australian Big Brother last year, one had a very female behaviour pattern, and mannerisms etc, and was completely gay. The other was much less so, and had chosent o be gay after vaccilating for a while, and from what he said, prety much out of being too slack to negotiate teh male/female relationship minefield.
Yes, some of the things that they have discovered since the advent of the MRI and other useful diagnostic tools and the clever way they are employing them to further their research is really very exciting and fascinating and just damn clever!!
Do not get me started on how I wish I was better at all things technological!!
I'm quite sure you'll get the hang of whatever it is you need to utilize to further your thirst for knowledge.
PET scansa re the littel grooveres they use to dynamically image the brain to see what bit is doing what when. I saw a quick thing on tellie the other night which disputes teh idea that artistic stuff all happens on teh rihgt.. Apparently much more evenly distributed than that. It's funny though, I am having trouble spellnig things lately, and apart from advancing senility, I think it might have something to do with teh amount of time I spend playing musci and developing my musical sense.
You don't need a PET scanner though, to see that male and female brains are distinctly different.
PET scansa re the littel grooveres they use to dynamically image the brain to see what bit is doing what when. I saw a quick thing on tellie the other night which disputes teh idea that artistic stuff all happens on teh rihgt.. Apparently much more evenly distributed than that. It's funny though, I am having trouble spellnig things lately, and apart from advancing senility, I think it might have something to do with teh amount of time I spend playing musci and developing my musical sense.
You don't need a PET scanner though, to see that male and female brains are distinctly different.
Well my rehab doctor would probably just say that you are struggling with simple functions because you are mentally overloaded!
And gee I don't know lucy I was thinking maybe your typing and spelling thing was just a natural extension of your handwriting, which if I go with the stereotype is quite possibly horrific???
But yes I agree that the male and female brain are distinctly and obviously different. I was, however in this case, specifically thinking of a little story I read recently about a woman, who was having an MRI and whilst they were watching she began insisting that there was a "presence" in the room. And they were able to map her brain activity as she was describing this experience. I think there may have been some kind of stimuli to bring on the "visions" of the "presence". Anyway, not very scientifically explained but highly interesting anyway. And I believe that they are also using MRI for many other types of experiments such as this. The arrival of the MRI is certainly going to clarify and help us to learn so many things about brain function. Particularly when used for the more emotional type experiments. And I'm quite sure that scientists haven't even begun to think up all the things we can use it for.
Well my rehab doctor would probably just say that you are struggling with simple functions because you are mentally overloaded!
And gee I don't know lucy I was thinking maybe your typing and spelling thing was just a natural extension of your handwriting, which if I go with the stereotype is quite possibly horrific???
But yes I agree that the male and female brain are distinctly and obviously different. I was, however in this case, specifically thinking of a little story I read recently about a woman, who was having an MRI and whilst they were watching she began insisting that there was a "presence" in the room. And they were able to map her brain activity as she was describing this experience. I think there may have been some kind of stimuli to bring on the "visions" of the "presence". Anyway, not very scientifically explained but highly interesting anyway. And I believe that they are also using MRI for many other types of experiments such as this. The arrival of the MRI is certainly going to clarify and help us to learn so many things about brain function. Particularly when used for the more emotional type experiments. And I'm quite sure that scientists haven't even begun to think up all the things we can use it for.
Actually at Laurentian University in Sudbury Ontario they perform experiments using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation to cause experiences of presences, like apparitions. It makes sense that MRI could cause this same effect. Any kind of magnetic interference that can transfer through the cranium can potentially alter brain waves.
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
So you are saying that atheists are missing a piece of their brain. Kinda like they've had a lobotomy. Interesting take.
No, I said that hasn't been researched.
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
Well my rehab doctor would probably just say that you are struggling with simple functions because you are mentally overloaded!
And gee I don't know lucy I was thinking maybe your typing and spelling thing was just a natural extension of your handwriting, which if I go with the stereotype is quite possibly horrific???
But yes I agree that the male and female brain are distinctly and obviously different. I was, however in this case, specifically thinking of a little story I read recently about a woman, who was having an MRI and whilst they were watching she began insisting that there was a "presence" in the room. And they were able to map her brain activity as she was describing this experience. I think there may have been some kind of stimuli to bring on the "visions" of the "presence". Anyway, not very scientifically explained but highly interesting anyway. And I believe that they are also using MRI for many other types of experiments such as this. The arrival of the MRI is certainly going to clarify and help us to learn so many things about brain function. Particularly when used for the more emotional type experiments. And I'm quite sure that scientists haven't even begun to think up all the things we can use it for.
Yes, definitely retarded, and yes, handwritten illegible rubbish has indeed become typed illegible rubbish as you suggest. !!!! Have a little laugh, go on, I do when I read some of the crap that comes off the keyboard!!!! I think the story might be a littel wrong, cos you can't really map brain activity with an MRI that I know of. Definitely can with a PET scan. I would certainly expect a PET scan to detect changes when someone is having a vision or feeling a preescence, because my interpretation of that is that it is coming from within, not from without. As I have previously mentioned, schizophrenia and other psycohotic illness can be seen on a PET scan. All fits to me.
Yes, definitely retarded, and yes, handwritten illegible rubbish has indeed become typed illegible rubbish as you suggest. !!!! Have a little laugh, go on, I do when I read some of the crap that comes off the keyboard!!!! I think the story might be a littel wrong, cos you can't really map brain activity with an MRI that I know of. Definitely can with a PET scan. I would certainly expect a PET scan to detect changes when someone is having a vision or feeling a preescence, because my interpretation of that is that it is coming from within, not from without. As I have previously mentioned, schizophrenia and other psycohotic illness can be seen on a PET scan. All fits to me.
fMRI is all the craze now. If you provide someone with a stimuli and image their brain you can see which parts light up.
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
Sounds like I need to do a littel catching up, that's the only trouble with being a drop-out, ya miss stuff !!
Haha, I'm a drop-out too
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
Sorry, been banned the last two days. But I've been wanting to ask this question since I saw the thread.
Where did god come from?
And this isn't a bait question. I've been wanting to know this for a very long time.
Well I probably can't help you with the answer, sorry. I guess there are people who would say that God has always just been. And there are those who would say that the idea of God has evolved over the millenia.
It's a really interesting question though. I hope somebody else comes forward with a theory.
Yes, definitely retarded, and yes, handwritten illegible rubbish has indeed become typed illegible rubbish as you suggest. !!!! Have a little laugh, go on, I do when I read some of the crap that comes off the keyboard!!!! I think the story might be a littel wrong, cos you can't really map brain activity with an MRI that I know of. Definitely can with a PET scan. I would certainly expect a PET scan to detect changes when someone is having a vision or feeling a preescence, because my interpretation of that is that it is coming from within, not from without. As I have previously mentioned, schizophrenia and other psycohotic illness can be seen on a PET scan. All fits to me.
Actually lucy, I'm kinda curious to know if I could decipher it!!
It's a bit of a personal skill of mine that I like to hone at every opportunity!
Is PET the one they use when they attach all those wires to epilepsy patients and keep them awake in an attempt to get them to fit so they can read the brain activity?
Anyway, I tried to find the article, but it's eluded me.
I think I originally read about it in the MX and then it turned up in The Age maybe. It was a little while ago. I'll keep hunting. It might turn up.
Fine by me, wasting time figuring out if religion is sound or not doesn't appeal to me. I can create my own morals and judgments that I believe are sound without someone else telling me that I'm wrong. I don't have to worry if what I'm doing is appealing to any higher being or w/e. I can just actually LIVE.
Good post ahnimus
DC '03 - Reading '04 - Philly '05 - Camden 1 '06 - DC '06 - E. Rutherford '06 - The Vic '07 - Lollapalooza '07 - DC '08 - EV DC 1 & 2 '08 (Met Ed!!) - EV Baltimore 1 & 2 '09 - EV NYC 1 '11 (Met Ed!) - Hartford '13 - GCF '15 - MSG 2 '16 - TOTD MSG '16 - Boston 1 & 2 '18 - SHN '21 - EV NYC 1 & 2 '22 - MSG '22
Fine by me, wasting time figuring out if religion is sound or not doesn't appeal to me. I can create my own morals and judgments that I believe are sound without someone else telling me that I'm wrong. I don't have to worry if what I'm doing is appealing to any higher being or w/e. I can just actually LIVE.
Is an atheist someone who denies the existence of God, or someone who denies the possible existence of God.
I acknowledge that it may be possible that God exists, though I very highly doubt it and therefor I believe that God does not exist.
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
You've done a lot of backsliding since your original post.
I'm getting a little bored with hearing that.
How so?
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
Comments
Yeah, I see what you are saying scw. I guess having watched OLS and Ahnimus bash it out for quite some time over many months and threads, I can understand that the comment was probably more of a personal one based on exhaustion, more than any arrogance or condescention. Although could be!!! They have been at this for a while!!
Anyway, plenty of people with mental and physical disabilities can understand science way better than I ever will. And I'm ok with that. I can and do read and attempt to understand as much as I can, but I don't ever kid myself that I'll be a rocket scientist anytime soon!!
I think we need to acknowledge both, all, points of view, and be accepting of them in order to move forward as a race. And I don't worry so much about the delivery or the "facts" or a prescribed way of presenting things as giving them more credence than those things that are intangible, "unexplained" if you like and perhaps lacking in "hard evidence" if you prefer.
We all understand and process information differently. Not right and wrong. Just different.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Made sense to me!
I think some athiests assume, just as some who believe in god assume. Just as some athiests don't assume, same as some who believe in god don't. That's human nature isn't it?
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
How the heck did you get that all so completely backwards? I'm saying the exact opposite.
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)
(")_(")
I have a theory of such spirituality.
During synaptogenesis neurons are wired and assigned to certain things. For example, the visual cortex is a group of neurons and synapses wired during synaptogenesis to handle input from the retina. The development of the visual cortex is dependent on input from the retina, if the eyes don't see light, then the visual cortex will not develop during synaptogenesis. So the important thing is to recognize that synaptogenesis depends on input to create these cortexes or groups of neurons, engrams if you like.
Ok, now, I'm going to explain that men and women's brains are different. The reason for this I theorize is linked to synaptogenesis. For example the amygdala is larger in women than in men. Women are expected in western culture to be more emotional, the amygdala is the emotional center of the brain, or the gateway to the limbic system. I think this is a rather circular system, the density or mass of the amygdala is determined during synaptogenesis based on the input from behavioral models, if parents expect or encourage a child to be more emotionally tuned, the mass of the amygdala predictably should be larger. I'd like to see some cross-culture studies of the effect of culture on the development of the amygdala to confirm this theory. It's sort of circular, because this larger amygdala allows a person to be more emotional, or emotions have more influence on decision making. So an adult woman who was subjected to stereotypical western gender models during infant synaptogenesis is over more likely to have greater emotional influence in decision making and to pass this on to her children.
So, then how does this apply to spirituality? A spiritual region of the brain has been identified, it is active during spiritual experiences and so on. It's unclear if atheists have this or not. My theory is that the expectancy of the brain to perform functions complimentary of the construct of spirituality is responsible for a synaptogenic association of neuron allowing for the experience of spirituality. There is no identifiable spirit organ that accepts input from the spiritual world, like an ear collects sound waves, and eyes collect light waves. That's not to say that one might be discovered, but as with light and sound, the experiences we have do not exist in reality as we experience them. They exist as waves of photons or electrons. So it's difficult to interpret the implications of actually having a spirit organ, which is speculation anyway. I think that the spirit brain was created during synaptogenesis to facilitate a social construct, the input is ideas or stories and the brain region produces the feeling that is expected to be associated with it.
That's my theory, and maybe it's nuts, but people thought Nikola Tesla was nuts and he invented Alternating Current A/C, Radio and Wireless amongst many other things, things which we all take for granted now. My theory is an explanation that is quantified and I think makes a lot of sense. You aren't likely to find another theory like this, unless someone has already thought of this, which is probably the case. I come to these ideas on my own, and then I end up finding out they are 2000 years old.
Don't forget or neglect teh role of testosterone during this process. testosterone shapes men's bodies and minds from an early stage in embryonic development, and continues to do so throughout neonatal and infancy,and indeed our whole lives. Failure of masculinization of the brain occurs sometimes, and you see this quite clearly in many gay men, esp the ones who are unambigously gay rather than equivocally.
/continue
Interesting. Do you think that the failure of masculinity in gay men is neurally correlated and is there any evidence that gay men were raised differently?
I'm not sure if you are aware of Margaret Mead's cross-culture study on gender roles. She found that several tribes in Papua New Guinea had reversed gender roles, and in at least one tribe both men and women filled feminine roles by standards of western culture. In addition another tribe encouraged sexual activity at all ages, children had sex with each other, it was the cultural norm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Mead#Research_in_other_societies
That's really interesting Ahnimus. And I think I even understand it to a degree. Which is nothing short of miraculous!!!
Feeling as you do is enough for many of us. And I don't know, perhaps it's my romantiziced feminine upbringing
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
It's absolutely fascinating how the brain develops. I'd like to obtain an animation or something. I wish I was better with Flash.
Yes, some of the things that they have discovered since the advent of the MRI and other useful diagnostic tools and the clever way they are employing them to further their research is really very exciting and fascinating and just damn clever!!
Do not get me started on how I wish I was better at all things technological!!
I'm quite sure you'll get the hang of whatever it is you need to utilize to further your thirst for knowledge.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
i am an atheist and i have not given up the search for enlightenment.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
There are two "types" of gay men. ones who are indisputably gay, alwys have been, always will be, and the ones who are not overtly gay intitalliy, and could have "gone either way" There is some evidence that deprivation of male affection during upbringing contributes to those ones becoming gay. There has been a bit of a belief that if a father hugs his son too much, that wil make him gay, but the opposite is more likely to be true.
If you look at eh 2 gay guys on Australian Big Brother last year, one had a very female behaviour pattern, and mannerisms etc, and was completely gay. The other was much less so, and had chosent o be gay after vaccilating for a while, and from what he said, prety much out of being too slack to negotiate teh male/female relationship minefield.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
PET scansa re the littel grooveres they use to dynamically image the brain to see what bit is doing what when. I saw a quick thing on tellie the other night which disputes teh idea that artistic stuff all happens on teh rihgt.. Apparently much more evenly distributed than that. It's funny though, I am having trouble spellnig things lately, and apart from advancing senility, I think it might have something to do with teh amount of time I spend playing musci and developing my musical sense.
You don't need a PET scanner though, to see that male and female brains are distinctly different.
Well my rehab doctor would probably just say that you are struggling with simple functions because you are mentally overloaded!
And gee I don't know lucy I was thinking maybe your typing and spelling thing was just a natural extension of your handwriting, which if I go with the stereotype is quite possibly horrific???
But yes I agree that the male and female brain are distinctly and obviously different. I was, however in this case, specifically thinking of a little story I read recently about a woman, who was having an MRI and whilst they were watching she began insisting that there was a "presence" in the room. And they were able to map her brain activity as she was describing this experience. I think there may have been some kind of stimuli to bring on the "visions" of the "presence". Anyway, not very scientifically explained but highly interesting anyway. And I believe that they are also using MRI for many other types of experiments such as this. The arrival of the MRI is certainly going to clarify and help us to learn so many things about brain function. Particularly when used for the more emotional type experiments. And I'm quite sure that scientists haven't even begun to think up all the things we can use it for.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Actually at Laurentian University in Sudbury Ontario they perform experiments using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation to cause experiences of presences, like apparitions. It makes sense that MRI could cause this same effect. Any kind of magnetic interference that can transfer through the cranium can potentially alter brain waves.
No, I said that hasn't been researched.
Yes, definitely retarded, and yes, handwritten illegible rubbish has indeed become typed illegible rubbish as you suggest. !!!! Have a little laugh, go on, I do when I read some of the crap that comes off the keyboard!!!! I think the story might be a littel wrong, cos you can't really map brain activity with an MRI that I know of. Definitely can with a PET scan. I would certainly expect a PET scan to detect changes when someone is having a vision or feeling a preescence, because my interpretation of that is that it is coming from within, not from without. As I have previously mentioned, schizophrenia and other psycohotic illness can be seen on a PET scan. All fits to me.
fMRI is all the craze now. If you provide someone with a stimuli and image their brain you can see which parts light up.
Sounds like I need to do a littel catching up, that's the only trouble with being a drop-out, ya miss stuff !!
Haha, I'm a drop-out too
Where did god come from?
And this isn't a bait question. I've been wanting to know this for a very long time.
is there something wrong with having your own opinion?
dreamer in my dream
we got the guns
i love you,but im..............callin out.........callin out
Well I probably can't help you with the answer, sorry. I guess there are people who would say that God has always just been. And there are those who would say that the idea of God has evolved over the millenia.
It's a really interesting question though. I hope somebody else comes forward with a theory.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Actually lucy, I'm kinda curious to know if I could decipher it!!
It's a bit of a personal skill of mine that I like to hone at every opportunity!
Is PET the one they use when they attach all those wires to epilepsy patients and keep them awake in an attempt to get them to fit so they can read the brain activity?
Anyway, I tried to find the article, but it's eluded me.
I think I originally read about it in the MX and then it turned up in The Age maybe. It was a little while ago. I'll keep hunting. It might turn up.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Fine by me, wasting time figuring out if religion is sound or not doesn't appeal to me. I can create my own morals and judgments that I believe are sound without someone else telling me that I'm wrong. I don't have to worry if what I'm doing is appealing to any higher being or w/e. I can just actually LIVE.
Good post ahnimus
you're not an atheist
Is an atheist someone who denies the existence of God, or someone who denies the possible existence of God.
I acknowledge that it may be possible that God exists, though I very highly doubt it and therefor I believe that God does not exist.
You've done a lot of backsliding since your original post.
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'm getting a little bored with hearing that.
How so?