Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Keywords

davis  GOAT  

Latest topics
» World Tour Finals 2017
Today at 9:07 pm by Jahu

» This Is What A Feminist Looks Like
Today at 5:46 pm by DECIMA

» Any rugby fans?
Fri Nov 17, 2017 7:45 pm by Tenez

» Nadal whines over surface match ups with Federer in 2017
Fri Nov 17, 2017 4:41 pm by Jahu

» The doping program joke of the ITF!!!
Fri Nov 17, 2017 11:51 am by legendkillar

» Anyone want to swap a day ticket on Monday for Sunday??
Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:33 am by Tenez

» So what's your projections for 2018?
Thu Nov 16, 2017 3:26 am by summerblues

» Race to London
Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:27 am by Tenez

» Baby WTF - Next-Gen ATP Finals 2017
Sun Nov 12, 2017 8:32 am by noleisthebest

November 2017
MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930   

Calendar Calendar

Affiliates
free forum


This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Page 9 of 12 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by Daniel on Sun Nov 05, 2017 5:03 am

Yes, they do have a need.  This is an established fact. Not an opinion.  The will to survive is one of the biggest mysteries of biology, Decima.

Daniel

Posts : 3127
Join date : 2013-11-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by bogbrush on Sun Nov 05, 2017 7:37 am

Daniel wrote:Yes, they do have a need.  This is an established fact. Not an opinion.  The will to survive is one of the biggest mysteries of biology, Decima.
How is this a mystery? It’s an anthropological inevitability; no orgamisn would get to copy without it so it’s quite obvious that every organism around will display behaviour that perpetuates itself.

That behaviour, by the way, might include the habit os near indifference to its own survival but it is then accompanied by staggeringly prolific reproductive capacity. In the end, the inevitability is only that an organism gets to be good at perpetuating itself, not the precise tactics.

What would be really weird is if there were apathetic organisms hanging around with no clue as to how they carry on. The true mystery would then be how on Earth they get to still be around.

bogbrush

Posts : 1289
Join date : 2015-03-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by bogbrush on Sun Nov 05, 2017 7:43 am

Thanks Daniel wrote:
Desire, Will.... these are just words for impulses, which is just a way of describing the actions driven by programming



Except, as has been repeated to you at least twice, these things are debated by scientists around the world and are one of the biggest mysteries of the human mind.  It isn't just "programming".  How these things "feel" falls under a branch of psychology that no math can answer.  

Also, why do things want to replicate their DNA and pass it on?  Why is there a need for survival?  In your world of pure math and science, why would matter want to duplicate and have a survival instinct?  Survival instinct cannot exist in a pure math / science view of things - which is why no-one has worked out the answer. Why would matter develop a "feeling" to stop it self terminating -or being terminated.  Answer that one.

You are making so many wild responses trying to avoid the fact that these arguments are debated around the world by prominent scientists.  They are not answered on Tenez forum by the Almighty Egoist Bog Brush.  I'm sorry.  But they aren't. They are massively complicated questions - much more complicated than you've reasoned down to an abacus.
See post above. There’s no mystery, it’s inevitable.

You’re far too much in awe of what you think people are saying. It’s true that some are trapped in answering self-referencing questions that have no answer because the qyestiin itself don’t need answering. Psychology is on a par with economics by the way (which is not a compliment), possibly even worse as it’s leading to monstrous pharmaceutical abuse because it’s vague ideas are taken far more seriously than they deserve.

This is why AI is going to explode over us, not because humans will become amazing at programming but because once artificial processing gets to write copies and compete with itself it’ll explode. What took organic creatures billions of years will take days, perhaps even seconds, and then we really better had watch out.

Once you take the view that we are just organic machines it all falls into place.

bogbrush

Posts : 1289
Join date : 2015-03-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by Tenez on Sun Nov 05, 2017 6:19 pm

I like the way everything looks so clear to you. In 6 pages of some interesting discussion, I don't remember you, BB, having questions,  doubts about everything as  "It is simple and all makes sense", while we (well most of us at least) are in the fog. You don;t know how the universe came about, you don;t know how life came about, you don't even know how you came to think, You do not know how your eyes, liver and consciousness work or came into being, You do not know how a caterpillar can behave so motherly to the wasp's eggs which eat it alive. but doesn't matter cause random mutations and relativity law explain it all.

There is not much difference between you and a very religious person who bags everything under  "God knows". At least the latter has some humility about his/her knowledge. It's the lack of doubt, questioning which I find weird if anything. It's an interesting trait though I do not think it is the trait of a scientist....on the contrary, I doubt much discovery would have occurred with this perspective on life. A searcher keeps raising questions, especially as we have so little answers.

As I said, everything might well be explicable, There might not be a magic touch from outside, the magic touch might be within matter and energy as it indeed brought an amazing world out of nowhere! Science doesn't make me look at it in a dead explicable way. Science has the opposite effect with me. It makes me understand how ridiculously intelligent nature is. I am not saying intelligent "good" as it is as intelligent mean....but certainly more intelligent than we can understand so far.

Regarding AI, the day it will be able to plug itself in, we will open a new thread about it.

Tenez

Posts : 17374
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by Tenez on Sun Nov 05, 2017 6:53 pm

Here is a bit of "random" mutation! Watch till the end!




Tenez

Posts : 17374
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by bogbrush on Sun Nov 05, 2017 7:01 pm

It’s simple because of what I said in the last line.

If you believe these created concepts like consciousness it’s complicated. If you accept that we’re just very complex organic machines all the mystery dissipates. No need for spirits, souls, and certainly no need for God.

Many of those things you cite are very well known. 

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/01/1/l_011_01.html

The caterpillar is doubtless deceived by the larvae. Probably they do something sneaky like co-opt the caterpillars scent or whatever so the thing acts on them as if it were itself pupating. Nasty crew!

And, yes, it’s natural selection that drives all this. And it still is.

The thing that fascinates me is the battle between organisation (complexity) and entropy. Well, it’s not a battle as entropy must win, but what level of complexity will be achieved in the huge time remaining.


Last edited by bogbrush on Sun Nov 05, 2017 7:08 pm; edited 1 time in total

bogbrush

Posts : 1289
Join date : 2015-03-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by noleisthebest on Sun Nov 05, 2017 7:06 pm

Tenez wrote:I like the way everything looks so clear to you. In 6 pages of some interesting discussion, I don't remember you, BB, having questions,  doubts about everything as  "It is simple and all makes sense", while we (well most of us at least) are in the fog. You don;t know how the universe came about, you don;t know how life came about, you don't even know how you came to think, You do not know how your eyes, liver and consciousness work or came into being, You do not know how a caterpillar can behave so motherly to the wasp's eggs which eat it alive. but doesn't matter cause random mutations and relativity law explain it all.

There is not much difference between you and a very religious person who bags everything under  "God knows". At least the latter has some humility about his/her knowledge. It's the lack of doubt, questioning which I find weird if anything. It's an interesting trait though I do not think it is the trait of a scientist....on the contrary, I doubt much discovery would have occurred with this perspective on life. A searcher keeps raising questions, especially as we have so little answers.

As I said, everything might well be explicable, There might not be a magic touch from outside, the magic touch might be within matter and energy as it indeed brought an amazing world out of nowhere! Science doesn't make me look at it in a dead explicable way. Science has the opposite effect with me. It makes me understand how ridiculously intelligent nature is. I am not saying intelligent "good" as it is as intelligent mean....but certainly more intelligent than we can understand so far.

Regarding AI, the day it will be able to plug itself in, we will open a new thread about it.

I was thinking aling the same lines today, having a dialogue with BB in my mind, rueing the lack of questions.

Because questions are the life power of truth searching.

BB is a materialist but a metaphysical one with his rigid frame he doesn’t see shattered in smallest shards.

One question leads to the next.

And there is so much to know.

In the end, answerless we are left admiring.


I have for example had difficult days where a rose along the road “jumped” at me and saved me with its beauty and fragrance.

How can that be?

How can we talk to the sea and the sea to us.

The amazing power of life that is in the same atoms of dust we all came from and the genius of creation that binds us all together.

And to think that I never used to notice those many years ago.

So maybe those questions and observations have lit up the whole world around as live and very much speaking, even singing in beautiful melodies.

So I am a bit sad we are still arguing over whether there is life or not...

But none of it surprises me, as people have always been like that.

So the key may be the humility or willigness to just keep asking...


noleisthebest

Posts : 25119
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by bogbrush on Sun Nov 05, 2017 7:10 pm

seriously nitb? This is like something off a really dodgy greetings card.

bogbrush

Posts : 1289
Join date : 2015-03-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by bogbrush on Sun Nov 05, 2017 7:14 pm

Tenez wrote:Here is a bit of "random" mutation! Watch till the end!
That was a great video. One thing, you seem to think I’m saying highly complex behaviour randomly arises. Obviously this isn’t true, the evolution of the eye (or indeed the feather, from the scale) is a clearer guide to the process of gradual development. It relies on each step bringing a marginal reproductive advantage.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hPLgfGX1I5Y

bogbrush

Posts : 1289
Join date : 2015-03-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by noleisthebest on Sun Nov 05, 2017 7:36 pm

bogbrush wrote:seriously nitb? This is like something off a really dodgy greetings card.
Seriously, BB.
I haven’t even started.

How does seeing he bird in the sky make you feel?
Or a newborn in your arms.
Why do you cry?

You are far more than what you believe you are...an atomic accident hoping to one day cross with a paralel line in eternity.

The whole thread has been stuck in a knot of whether there is life...

How can we then even begin to discuss spiritual themes.

The more you ask the deeper the mysteries open...in the end you can just stand amazed at the genius of creator.

Microcosmos, macrocosmos.

Oh, the beauty of it all.

I know this all sounds gaga to you, but it’s very real.

Poetry, music.

Each question has half the answer.

noleisthebest

Posts : 25119
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by Tenez on Sun Nov 05, 2017 7:53 pm

Stay tune BB. Science is evolving fast. A few centuries ago, people were isolating and bagging up wheat believing that mice would spontaneously generate. The more science advances, the more it realises how tough it is to create life. I believe searchers have even given up on it as the conditions today do not seem as good as 4billion years ago and realise there are many special circumstances which need to be concurring for life to happen. The more they learn, the more they realise how special it is to have matter replicating itself.

Tenez

Posts : 17374
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by bogbrush on Sun Nov 05, 2017 8:06 pm

noleisthebest wrote:
bogbrush wrote:seriously nitb? This is like something off a really dodgy greetings card.
Seriously, BB.
I haven’t even started.

How does seeing he bird in the sky make you feel?
Or a newborn in your arms.
Why do you cry?

You are far more than what you believe you are...an atomic accident hoping to one day cross with a paralel line in eternity.

The whole thread has been stuck in a knot of whether there is life...

How can we then even begin to discuss spiritual themes.

The more you ask the deeper the mysteries open...in the end you can just stand amazed at the genius of creator.

Microcosmos, macrocosmos.

Oh, the beauty of it all.

I know this all sounds gaga to you, but it’s very real.

Poetry, music.

Each question has half the answer.
Genius!!!  Winking Cool

bogbrush

Posts : 1289
Join date : 2015-03-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by bogbrush on Sun Nov 05, 2017 8:08 pm

Tenez wrote:Stay tune BB. Science is evolving fast. A few centuries ago, people were isolating and bagging up wheat believing that mice would spontaneously generate. The more science advances, the more it realises how tough it is to create life. I believe searchers have even given up on it as the conditions today do not seem as good as 4billion years ago and realise there are many special circumstances which need to be concurring for life to happen. The more they learn, the more they realise how special it is to have matter replicating itself.  
So I guess it must have been done by a supernatural force. Yes, that’s clearly the most reasonable conclusion to draw.


bogbrush

Posts : 1289
Join date : 2015-03-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by Daniel on Sun Nov 05, 2017 8:23 pm

There's a whole branch of science and philosophy on this, yet you somehow think you know it all.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia

As I said, BB.  You need to start writing your paper.  Laugh

Daniel

Posts : 3127
Join date : 2013-11-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by Tenez on Sun Nov 05, 2017 8:25 pm

bogbrush wrote:
Tenez wrote:Stay tune BB. Science is evolving fast. A few centuries ago, people were isolating and bagging up wheat believing that mice would spontaneously generate. The more science advances, the more it realises how tough it is to create life. I believe searchers have even given up on it as the conditions today do not seem as good as 4billion years ago and realise there are many special circumstances which need to be concurring for life to happen. The more they learn, the more they realise how special it is to have matter replicating itself.  
So I guess it must have been done by a supernatural force. Yes, that’s clearly the most reasonable conclusion to draw.


You see you do not have a scientific mind. Who is talking about a supernatural force again bar you? Don't you know that matter and energies ARE forces, they do not need to be supernatural? You are trying hard to ridicule me but you clearly lack knowledge, understanding but worse curiosity. You know 2+2 = 4.....but outside that there is not much thinking, I am afraid.
You certainly do sound like a dead machine.

Tenez

Posts : 17374
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by Daniel on Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:00 pm

I actually agree with Tenez, as shocking as that is.  Richard Feynman would ridicule your way of thinking something rotten, BB.

Daniel

Posts : 3127
Join date : 2013-11-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by bogbrush on Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:24 pm

Daniel wrote:I actually agree with Tenez, as shocking as that is.  Richard Feynman would ridicule your way of thinking something rotten, BB.
Oh shit, oh someone might disagree? Oh wow.

Still, I think it’s good you agree with Tenez. Seriously, I do.

Could you explain what it is you agree with because after pages and pages there’s not a single actual theory from anyone exceot me. Just mysticism and the product of fearful religious upbringing. I’d like to read what it is you agree with.

To me it’s just a machine. There’s no soul, no spirit, no God and no magic. Just physics and process. The best thing though is that that’s no reason not to stay on the ride,

Please explain the alternative theory, in positive terms.

bogbrush

Posts : 1289
Join date : 2015-03-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by noleisthebest on Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:26 pm

bogbrush wrote:
Daniel wrote:I actually agree with Tenez, as shocking as that is.  Richard Feynman would ridicule your way of thinking something rotten, BB.
Oh shit, oh someone might disagree? Oh wow.

Pages and pages, and not a single actual theory from anyone exceot me. Just mysticism and the product of fearful religious upbringing.

It’s just a machine. There’s no soul, no spirit, no God and no magic. Just physics and process. The best thing though is that that’s no reason not to stay on the ride,

If you were just a machine, you wouldn’t be so keen on telling us how wrong you think we all are.

noleisthebest

Posts : 25119
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by Tenez on Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:27 pm

bogbrush wrote:
Daniel wrote:I actually agree with Tenez, as shocking as that is.  Richard Feynman would ridicule your way of thinking something rotten, BB.
Oh shit, oh someone might disagree? Oh wow.

Pages and pages, and not a single actual theory from anyone exceot me. Just mysticism and the product of fearful religious upbringing.

It’s just a machine. There’s no soul, no spirit, no God and no magic. Just physics and process. The best thing though is that that’s no reason not to stay on the ride,
Allahu Akbar!



Last edited by Tenez on Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:33 pm; edited 2 times in total

Tenez

Posts : 17374
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by bogbrush on Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:31 pm

noleisthebest wrote:
bogbrush wrote:
Daniel wrote:I actually agree with Tenez, as shocking as that is.  Richard Feynman would ridicule your way of thinking something rotten, BB.
Oh shit, oh someone might disagree? Oh wow.

Pages and pages, and not a single actual theory from anyone exceot me. Just mysticism and the product of fearful religious upbringing.

It’s just a machine. There’s no soul, no spirit, no God and no magic. Just physics and process. The best thing though is that that’s no reason not to stay on the ride,

If you were just a machine, you wouldn’t be so keen on telling us how wrong you think we all are.
Course I would. I’m programmed to explore my environment and make sense of it, and I’m programmed to compete. It’s inevitable.

Anyway, explanations of alternative theory. Anyone?

bogbrush

Posts : 1289
Join date : 2015-03-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by bogbrush on Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:35 pm

Daniel wrote:There's a whole branch of science and philosophy on this, yet you somehow think you know it all.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia

As I said, BB.  You need to start writing your paper.  Laugh
A problem explaining a thing that doesn’t exist will indeed tend to be hard. Weird that people are so attached to these concepts, it doesn’t trouble me at all.

bogbrush

Posts : 1289
Join date : 2015-03-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by Tenez on Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:45 pm

bogbrush wrote:
noleisthebest wrote:
bogbrush wrote:
Daniel wrote:I actually agree with Tenez, as shocking as that is.  Richard Feynman would ridicule your way of thinking something rotten, BB.
Oh shit, oh someone might disagree? Oh wow.

Pages and pages, and not a single actual theory from anyone exceot me. Just mysticism and the product of fearful religious upbringing.

It’s just a machine. There’s no soul, no spirit, no God and no magic. Just physics and process. The best thing though is that that’s no reason not to stay on the ride,

If you were just a machine, you wouldn’t be so keen on telling us how wrong you think we all are.
Course I would. I’m programmed to explore my environment and make sense of it, and I’m programmed to compete. It’s inevitable.

Anyway, explanations of alternative theory. Anyone?

What theory? You do explain bugger all. I am surprised you do not even see how you keep avoiding questions you don't know. You are the one providing unbased facts as soon as against the wall, hence my Allahu Akbar cause you certainly do sound like one of them.

"Desire, as so defined, was always there,
euh? Is that part of the theory?
As we become more complex, better able to process information and manipulate concepts so did those ‘desires’ develop.
That's me saying it a post or 2 before you, you were clueless before that.
More complex than the bacteria but still fundamentally the same.
Not sure what this means in your reasoning. But if I read correctly that paragraph, Desire was there before evolution. right? Any theory proving this? Did not read it in Darwin's book!

I say it’s simple because once we discard these artificial concepts it really is.
"artificial concept? yep keep discarding! It's easier to make sense with 2+2 =4 than 2 parallel lines meet at infinity!


Last edited by Tenez on Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:48 pm; edited 1 time in total

Tenez

Posts : 17374
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by noleisthebest on Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:46 pm

bogbrush wrote:
noleisthebest wrote:
bogbrush wrote:
Daniel wrote:I actually agree with Tenez, as shocking as that is.  Richard Feynman would ridicule your way of thinking something rotten, BB.
Oh shit, oh someone might disagree? Oh wow.

Pages and pages, and not a single actual theory from anyone exceot me. Just mysticism and the product of fearful religious upbringing.

It’s just a machine. There’s no soul, no spirit, no God and no magic. Just physics and process. The best thing though is that that’s no reason not to stay on the ride,

If you were just a machine, you wouldn’t be so keen on telling us how wrong you think we all are.
Course I would. I’m programmed to explore my environment and make sense of it, and I’m programmed to compete. It’s inevitable.

Anyway, explanations of alternative theory. Anyone?

This is not a “theory”, but you can start there: read the Gospels.

noleisthebest

Posts : 25119
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by bogbrush on Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:57 pm

We Tenez wrote:
bogbrush wrote:
noleisthebest wrote:
bogbrush wrote:
Daniel wrote:I actually agree with Tenez, as shocking as that is.  Richard Feynman would ridicule your way of thinking something rotten, BB.
Oh shit, oh someone might disagree? Oh wow.

Pages and pages, and not a single actual theory from anyone exceot me. Just mysticism and the product of fearful religious upbringing.

It’s just a machine. There’s no soul, no spirit, no God and no magic. Just physics and process. The best thing though is that that’s no reason not to stay on the ride,

If you were just a machine, you wouldn’t be so keen on telling us how wrong you think we all are.
Course I would. I’m programmed to explore my environment and make sense of it, and I’m programmed to compete. It’s inevitable.

Anyway, explanations of alternative theory. Anyone?

What theory? You do explain bugger all. I am surprised you do not even see how you keep avoiding questions you don't know. You are the one providing unbased facts as soon as against the wall, hence my Allahu Akbar cause you certainly do sound like one of them.

"Desire, as so defined, was always there,
euh? Is that part of the theory?
As we become more complex, better able to process information and manipulate concepts so did those ‘desires’ develop.
That's me saying it a post or 2 before you, you were clueless before that.
More complex than the bacteria but still fundamentally the same.
Not sure what this means in your reasoning. But if I read correctly that paragraph, Desire was there before evolution. right? Any theory proving this? Did not read it in Darwin's book!

I say it’s simple because once we discard these artificial concepts it really is.
"artificial concept? yep keep discarding! It's easier to make sense with 2+2 =4 than 2 parallel lines meet at infinity!
You don’t seem to have an idea, just a resentment of what I say.

All I say is this. There are self copying molecules. They inevitably become more complex because successful complexity outcompetes predecessors. We call these organisms. Repeat this for billions and billions and billions of iterations. You end up with current complexity.

At no point does a soul enter the room. Or will. These are words to describe the habits of successful organisms. Desire isn’t before or after, desire is a word to describe the practice of a successful organism.

Now, what’s your actual theory? I really want to hear it stated in terms of what it is, not what it isn’t.

Edit: the two parallel lines don’t meet. That’s why we use the term infinity because you never get there.


Last edited by bogbrush on Sun Nov 05, 2017 10:01 pm; edited 1 time in total

bogbrush

Posts : 1289
Join date : 2015-03-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by bogbrush on Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:59 pm

noleisthebest wrote:
bogbrush wrote:
noleisthebest wrote:
bogbrush wrote:
Daniel wrote:I actually agree with Tenez, as shocking as that is.  Richard Feynman would ridicule your way of thinking something rotten, BB.
Oh shit, oh someone might disagree? Oh wow.

Pages and pages, and not a single actual theory from anyone exceot me. Just mysticism and the product of fearful religious upbringing.

It’s just a machine. There’s no soul, no spirit, no God and no magic. Just physics and process. The best thing though is that that’s no reason not to stay on the ride,

If you were just a machine, you wouldn’t be so keen on telling us how wrong you think we all are.
Course I would. I’m programmed to explore my environment and make sense of it, and I’m programmed to compete. It’s inevitable.

Anyway, explanations of alternative theory. Anyone?

This is not a “theory”, but you can start there: read the Gospels.
The fabrications of ancient Arabs. No thanks.

bogbrush

Posts : 1289
Join date : 2015-03-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by noleisthebest on Sun Nov 05, 2017 10:04 pm

bogbrush wrote:
noleisthebest wrote:
bogbrush wrote:
noleisthebest wrote:
bogbrush wrote:
Daniel wrote:I actually agree with Tenez, as shocking as that is.  Richard Feynman would ridicule your way of thinking something rotten, BB.
Oh shit, oh someone might disagree? Oh wow.

Pages and pages, and not a single actual theory from anyone exceot me. Just mysticism and the product of fearful religious upbringing.

It’s just a machine. There’s no soul, no spirit, no God and no magic. Just physics and process. The best thing though is that that’s no reason not to stay on the ride,

If you were just a machine, you wouldn’t be so keen on telling us how wrong you think we all are.
Course I would. I’m programmed to explore my environment and make sense of it, and I’m programmed to compete. It’s inevitable.

Anyway, explanations of alternative theory. Anyone?

This is not a “theory”, but you can start there: read the Gospels.
The fabrications of ancient Arabs. No thanks.
???

Never mind...maybe you will one day. It’s about Christ...the one whose birthday millions will celebrate in a few weeks.

It taught me a great lesson in humility...

noleisthebest

Posts : 25119
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by bogbrush on Sun Nov 05, 2017 10:11 pm

Well it is all written by ancient Arabs. That’s not contentious is it?

The Gospels are competing / complementary stories of the human Jesus. The religion is different. It isn’t about the human Christ. It’s about a God who sends himself incarnate to be killed / not killed as sacrifice to himself for the sins of others so long as they believe. The man Jesus says some positive things but that is not the point of Christianity, it is that only by accepting what is written by the ancient Arabs do you live beyond death.

It’s completely mad, even if the human Jesus said a lot of decent things.

bogbrush

Posts : 1289
Join date : 2015-03-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by DECIMA on Sun Nov 05, 2017 11:09 pm

Wow, Bogbrush is taking a lot of heat!
Not seen such a discrepancy on number of posters on each side of a debate on this forum since I alone was defending Nadal against the haters.

DECIMA

Posts : 4484
Join date : 2013-05-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by DECIMA on Sun Nov 05, 2017 11:14 pm

Where exactly do people disagree with Bogbrush? Any specifics?
The only thing he's been guilty of is being smug, which I find quite funny, but obviously some people aren't liking it. Doesn't mean he's wrong.

I've been very clear where I agree and disagree with Bogbrush. I can summarise the whole debate with him:

In terms of the process right after the starting point, on both debates (how atoms organised themselves after being created, and then how life on earth evolved through evolution) Bogbrush is right on both counts.
Take bacterial resistance to antibiotics. The bacteria don't need willpower. The ones with random mutations which help them survive, will survive, and naturally will then multiply in greater numbers. Follows logic, doesn't need any supernatural intervention, or bacteria mystically having willpower.

However what Bogbrush and no scientists have been able to do yet, is explain the origins of the origins. Again this applies to both debates, on how matter was created in the first place, and then how life started in the first place.
I think it's likely that the answer to both questions are 'natural' and 'scientific', even if humans don't have the capability to figure it out. I think this because I've observed a pattern where humans explain phenomena with the supernatural, but it turns out to be explainable by natural science.
BB and I differ as he sees things with certainty, while I still have doubt (I'll use the phrase 'likely' rather than definitely). He does this because he likes being 'decisive', though I feel he overstates his case in order to be as such.

See there you go, it's quite easy. Tenez, perhaps with some clarity try and state what your actual positions and points of difference are. Right now the debate is people disagreeing with Bogbrush on vague talking points, and then NITB chipping in with her reading recommendations.

DECIMA

Posts : 4484
Join date : 2013-05-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by Tenez on Sun Nov 05, 2017 11:19 pm

bogbrush wrote:You don’t seem to have an idea, just a resentment of what I say
Correct I do not have a clear idea. No-one does. What you say is what Darwin says, nothing new. As mentioned it's incomplete and should not satisfy fully any smart soul.

All I say is this. There are self copying molecules. They inevitably become more complex because successful complexity outcompetes predecessors. We call these organisms. Repeat this for billions and billions and billions of iterations. You end up with current complexity.
I think I got that. You forgot I studied compared anatomy and cellular biology. It still does not say where  desire intervenes in its simplest form in the evolution. Do you know? Where does thinking intervene in its simplest form? I know thinking is just a "chemical process", but when does that chemical process appear in the evolution. Surely, this should be traceable. 3 pages of discussing it and no answer.  

Desire is a word to describe the practice of a successful organism.
For someone who thinks everything is clear, this is quite a confusing statement. I thought the word for that was survival. Desire is a different word.

Now, what’s your actual theory? I really want to hear it stated in terms of what it is, not what it isn’t.
My theory, on top of what we know from Mendl or Darwin about evolution and physics is still searching as we still have to learn a lot more. It's a bit like Newton being right but incomplete until Poincare and Einstein, came about. The point is the more we discover, the more we understand how intelligent matter and/or life is.

Edit: the two parallel lines don’t meet. That’s why we use the term infinity because you never get there.
Then you never get a line, let alone 2 parallel ones!

Tenez

Posts : 17374
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by bogbrush on Mon Nov 06, 2017 12:27 am

Right, so your position is that because you don’t grasp it nobody else is allowed to. That’s clear enough.

Acquiring energy is the root of what you term desire. It begins passively, it develops proactivity as a result of minor variation to such as sea anemone or filter feeders, becoming increasingly proactive, leading to positiveky sophisticated acquisitive behaviour that you’d call high levels of desire. Ok?

No, survival is the result. Desire describes its behaviour.

Intelligence is just a description of processing capability and has no impact of the  process of becoming ‘intelligent’.

You can have a line I was just pointing out the error in you saying lines meet at infinity.


Got to say, for such vociferous opposition I’m surprised at what little you have to say about your own theory. Comes across as a bit thin.

bogbrush

Posts : 1289
Join date : 2015-03-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by summerblues on Mon Nov 06, 2017 12:32 am

DECIMA wrote:I made the point which you didn't address that there is a difference between believing something on faith that hasn't yet been resolved by scientists, and believing something which has been disproved by science. The latter does deserve more scrutiny and critical analysis.
Maybe I do not quite understand what you mean, because I thought I kind of addressed that in my second paragraph.

summerblues

Posts : 3055
Join date : 2012-05-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by Tenez on Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:40 am

bogbrush wrote:Right, so your position is that because you don’t grasp it nobody else is allowed to. That’s clear enough.
Just that you are not aware of your ignorance when others are. That's because you religiously believe in an incomplete theory which is itself in evolution and therefore likely to fine tune in time.

Acquiring energy is the root of what you term desire. It begins passively, it develops proactivity as a result of minor variation to such as sea anemone or filter feeders, becoming increasingly proactive, leading to positiveky sophisticated acquisitive behaviour that you’d call high levels of desire. Ok?
Again you repeat what I told you. Looks like you are learning from me. That's good.  So, does a rock (or elements of it) desire to replicate at some stage (even if it is once in a while)? What makes it passively and suddenly proactively? And do you know where those energies come from? do you know if those energies also affect, in turn, matter they come from? You know the relative theory would seem to think so.
BTW, what is passive desire? those 2 words do not quite fit together.

No, survival is the result. Desire describes its behaviour.
More non-sense.

You can have a line I was just pointing out the error in you saying lines meet at infinity.
Ouch.  A line is infinitely thin and infinitely long. So if I can't have my infinity you won't get your line either! And you say I am wrong?

Got to say, for such vociferous opposition I’m surprised at what little you have to say about your own theory. Comes across as a bit thin.
Maybe you want to check what a theory is! By definition it is an hypothesis, especially when applied to human sciences. You take it as truth....not much different than those shooting Allahu Akbar!

Tenez

Posts : 17374
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by noleisthebest on Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:15 am

Tenez wrote:Here is a bit of "random" mutation! Watch till the end!




Amazing what the wasp’s virus poison did to caterpillar’s brain.

I can’t help drawing a parallel to a man’s fallen state.

noleisthebest

Posts : 25119
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by Tenez on Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:22 am

noleisthebest wrote:
Tenez wrote:Here is a bit of "random" mutation! Watch till the end!




Amazing what the wasp’s virus poison did to caterpillar’s brain.

I can’t help drawing a parallel to a man’s fallen state.
Yes, science says a virus invades the caterpillar brain, which is true. People used to say the caterpillar is possessed by the wasp's spirit. It's just 2 different visions of the same thing.

Tenez

Posts : 17374
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by Tenez on Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:26 am

I learnt many parasitic cycles. A lot of them are so scary clever and vicious.

Tenez

Posts : 17374
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by noleisthebest on Mon Nov 06, 2017 10:40 am

Tenez wrote:I learnt many parasitic cycles. A lot of them are so scary clever and vicious.
I appreciate your sharing that knowledge.

I observe it all from a different plain, angle, not so much scientifucally but tuning in with the creation, feeling that life and communing with it, learning from it.
And it’s a happy and joyful union.

So you coming with the illustrarion of  “other”, destructive side of it is fascinating.

noleisthebest

Posts : 25119
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by noleisthebest on Mon Nov 06, 2017 10:46 am

Tenez wrote:
noleisthebest wrote:
Tenez wrote:Here is a bit of "random" mutation! Watch till the end!




Amazing what the wasp’s virus poison did to caterpillar’s brain.

I can’t help drawing a parallel to a man’s fallen state.
Yes, science says a virus invades the caterpillar brain, which is true. People used to say the caterpillar is possessed by the wasp's spirit. It's just 2 different visions of the same thing.

Yes, I am aware of it.
And it’s always good and interesting to see it from a scientific lense for me, it makes me marvel even more.
But science has its limits, and people behind it often with agenda. That’s what lets it down.

noleisthebest

Posts : 25119
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by Tenez on Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:54 am

Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh

This will lighten up the debate and bring it back to the OP.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/41883462

Italians!....do they care about PC?

Tenez

Posts : 17374
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by noleisthebest on Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:59 am

Tenez wrote:Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh

This will lighten up the debate and bring it back to the OP.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/41883462

Italians!....do they care about PC?

Exactly!
They are too busy enjoying life.

All the WTA hags with their brooms are going to be out in full force now.

noleisthebest

Posts : 25119
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by bogbrush on Mon Nov 06, 2017 12:30 pm

Tenez wrote:
bogbrush wrote:Right, so your position is that because you don’t grasp it nobody else is allowed to. That’s clear enough.
Just that you are not aware of your ignorance when others are. That's because you religiously believe in an incomplete theory which is itself in evolution and therefore likely to fine tune in time.

Acquiring energy is the root of what you term desire. It begins passively, it develops proactivity as a result of minor variation to such as sea anemone or filter feeders, becoming increasingly proactive, leading to positiveky sophisticated acquisitive behaviour that you’d call high levels of desire. Ok?
Again you repeat what I told you. Looks like you are learning from me. That's good.  So, does a rock (or elements of it) desire to replicate at some stage (even if it is once in a while)? What makes it passively and suddenly proactively? And do you know where those energies come from? do you know if those energies also affect, in turn, matter they come from? You know the relative theory would seem to think so.
BTW, what is passive desire? those 2 words do not quite fit together.

No, survival is the result. Desire describes its behaviour.
More non-sense.

You can have a line I was just pointing out the error in you saying lines meet at infinity.
Ouch.  A line is infinitely thin and infinitely long. So if I can't have my infinity you won't get your line either! And you say I am wrong?

Got to say, for such vociferous opposition I’m surprised at what little you have to say about your own theory. Comes across as a bit thin.
Maybe you want to check what a theory is! By definition it is an hypothesis, especially when applied to human sciences. You take it as truth....not much different than those shooting Allahu Akbar!
My statements are internally consistent. Yours are......?

Oh deasr, well if that makes you happy then don't let me stop you. One more thing I can help you with is reading; the "it" is "acquiring energy", which is the "root of desire". Not desire, acquiring energy. And that begins passively and develops into proactive strategies that become called "desire". Got that? Brilliant!!

Afraid it's English. Not your first language I know so I make allowances.

No, a line is as long as it's defined. Another ouch moment there.

More English issues for you, still if it helps you avoid the challenge of explaining your ideas rather than seeking ever-decreasing ways to moan about mine then it's all good!

bogbrush

Posts : 1289
Join date : 2015-03-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by bogbrush on Mon Nov 06, 2017 12:31 pm

Tenez wrote:
noleisthebest wrote:
Tenez wrote:Here is a bit of "random" mutation! Watch till the end!




Amazing what the wasp’s virus poison did to caterpillar’s brain.

I can’t help drawing a parallel to a man’s fallen state.
Yes, science says a virus invades the caterpillar brain, which is true. People used to say the caterpillar is possessed by the wasp's spirit. It's just 2 different visions of the same thing.
It really isn't. One is chemicals, the other is an invented mythical concept to fill in for ignorance. I know you're struggling with this concept but they actually aren't the same thing.

bogbrush

Posts : 1289
Join date : 2015-03-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by legendkillar on Mon Nov 06, 2017 1:08 pm

bogbrush wrote:
noleisthebest wrote:
bogbrush wrote:
Daniel wrote:I actually agree with Tenez, as shocking as that is.  Richard Feynman would ridicule your way of thinking something rotten, BB.
Oh shit, oh someone might disagree? Oh wow.

Pages and pages, and not a single actual theory from anyone exceot me. Just mysticism and the product of fearful religious upbringing.

It’s just a machine. There’s no soul, no spirit, no God and no magic. Just physics and process. The best thing though is that that’s no reason not to stay on the ride,

If you were just a machine, you wouldn’t be so keen on telling us how wrong you think we all are.
Course I would. I’m programmed to explore my environment and make sense of it, and I’m programmed to compete. It’s inevitable.

Anyway, explanations of alternative theory. Anyone?


How this is has reached 9 pages is beyond me. All I've seen is a reputable theory put out there and it being canned with maybes. That's essentially been it. Random waffle! Alternative thinking put out there with zero application or understanding.

The best paradox I can offer came from one of my favourite films: Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade. Anyone seen it? If so, remember near the beginning when Indiana Jones summarized beautifully Archeology when he stated it was the search for facts and that if it's truth you want, go to philosophy class. Basically saying Fact and Truth and mutually exclusive of one and another. And that's exactly what science and faith. Science is about the how and not about the why. I have seen BB's thinking around the how and all I've seen counter that is "Not that simple" which has been met with "Ah ok, then what is it?" to which that has been met with "Could be this, or that, maybe, who knows" and even shoulder shrugging.

BB's theory has never been about the why, been about the how. Which is why I have seen on here a big misinterpretation of his views. Asking why in my opinion will just lead you to do your head in thinking about it. It seems if we can ask the why and not just accept the how that there must be alternative theories that go against the how. So essentially how we came to be is a bigger mystery than the ill fated meaning of life.

I don't think this debate can really go any further beyond the repetition seen over the last 5 pages!

legendkillar

Posts : 1926
Join date : 2012-10-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by Tenez on Mon Nov 06, 2017 1:39 pm

bogbrush wrote:My statements are internally consistent. Yours are......?

Oh deasr, well if that makes you happy then don't let me stop you. One more thing I can help you with is reading; the "it" is "acquiring energy", which is the "root of desire". Not desire, acquiring energy. And that begins passively and develops into proactive strategies that become called "desire". Got that? Brilliant!!

Afraid it's English. Not your first language I know so I make allowances.

No, a line is as long as it's defined. Another ouch moment there.

More English issues for you, still if it helps you avoid the challenge of explaining your ideas rather than seeking ever-decreasing ways to moan about mine then it's all good!
Mines are evolving.

Amazing how your basic and unproven explanations satisfy you. Again, it is there for everybody to see. You do not know what matter is made off but the whole of your "theory" is based on it. Do you know whether Energy came first or was it Matter? what form were they in to start with? You seem to know what no scientist knows. Bottom line, it tells us more about you and your fear of the unknown than anything else. Maybe a telling sign to that was you first think we create gods to ease our minds. Was that a piece of unconscious transfer?

Don;t worry about my english, it is your logos which is to be questioned.

Oh  and a defined line is called a segment. Not a line.


Last edited by Tenez on Mon Nov 06, 2017 2:09 pm; edited 2 times in total

Tenez

Posts : 17374
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by noleisthebest on Mon Nov 06, 2017 1:55 pm

legendkillar wrote:
How this is has reached 9 pages is beyond me. All I've seen is a reputable theory put out there and it being canned with maybes. That's essentially been it. Random waffle! Alternative thinking put out there with zero application or understanding.
The best paradox I can offer came from one of my favourite films: Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade. Anyone seen it? If so, remember near the beginning when Indiana Jones summarized beautifully Archeology when he stated it was the search for facts and that if it's truth you want, go to philosophy class. Basically saying Fact and Truth and mutually exclusive of one and another.faith. And that's exactly what science and  Science is about the how and not about the why. I have seen BB's thinking around the how and all I've seen counter that is "Not that simple" which has been met with "Ah ok, then what is it?" to which that has been met with "Could be this, or that, maybe, who knows" and even shoulder shrugging.

BB's theory has never been about the why, been about the how. Which is why I have seen on here a big misinterpretation of his views. Asking why in my opinion will just lead you to do your head in thinking about it. It seems if we can ask the why and not just accept the how that there must be alternative theories that go against the how. So essentially how we came to be is a bigger mystery than the ill fated meaning of life.

I don't think this debate can really go any further beyond the repetition seen over the last 5 pages!

Funny how you and Amri feel the need to "defend" and further interpret BB.

Like we all can't see it for ourselves.

The reason it got over 9 pages is because BB can't extract himself from his own limited corner he has boxed himself in, so he keeps repeating the same louder and louder.

As for Indiana Jones, I am sure rotla has seen it, I haven't.
And a bit of thin ice starting to quote hollywood films as sources of wisdom.

Esp as they are wrong...meant to be wrong and brainwash.

noleisthebest

Posts : 25119
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by Tenez on Mon Nov 06, 2017 1:59 pm

legendkillar wrote:
How this is has reached 9 pages is beyond me. All I've seen is a reputable theory put out there and it being canned with maybes. That's essentially been it. Random waffle! Alternative thinking put out there with zero application or understanding.

The best paradox I can offer came from one of my favourite films: Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade. Anyone seen it? If so, remember near the beginning when Indiana Jones summarized beautifully Archeology when he stated it was the search for facts and that if it's truth you want, go to philosophy class. Basically saying Fact and Truth and mutually exclusive of one and another. And that's exactly what science and faith. Science is about the how and not about the why. I have seen BB's thinking around the how and all I've seen counter that is "Not that simple" which has been met with "Ah ok, then what is it?" to which that has been met with "Could be this, or that, maybe, who knows" and even shoulder shrugging.

BB's theory has never been about the why, been about the how. Which is why I have seen on here a big misinterpretation of his views. Asking why in my opinion will just lead you to do your head in thinking about it. It seems if we can ask the why and not just accept the how that there must be alternative theories that go against the how. So essentially how we came to be is a bigger mystery than the ill fated meaning of life.

I don't think this debate can really go any further beyond the repetition seen over the last 5 pages!
But BB says there is no why. This very approach which is completely unscientific and as fundamentally based on his faith of "Science Akbar" (or the Golden Vault but he does not understand the analogy). Cause even in the hows, there are whys (reasons and purpose). Understanding how feelings work scientifically for instance, does not make those feelings any more deader! When Darwin lost his daughter, did he tell himself, how that was just a broken machine, I can't care less as I am a machine myself? The roller coaster of life, and I believe you know a bit of it yourself, is as real as the atoms and energies sustaining it. It is only fair to question science further to get more answers. But apparently, not BB...he knows it all!

Tenez

Posts : 17374
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by legendkillar on Mon Nov 06, 2017 2:03 pm

noleisthebest wrote:
legendkillar wrote:
How this is has reached 9 pages is beyond me. All I've seen is a reputable theory put out there and it being canned with maybes. That's essentially been it. Random waffle! Alternative thinking put out there with zero application or understanding.
The best paradox I can offer came from one of my favourite films: Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade. Anyone seen it? If so, remember near the beginning when Indiana Jones summarized beautifully Archeology when he stated it was the search for facts and that if it's truth you want, go to philosophy class. Basically saying Fact and Truth and mutually exclusive of one and another.faith. And that's exactly what science and  Science is about the how and not about the why. I have seen BB's thinking around the how and all I've seen counter that is "Not that simple" which has been met with "Ah ok, then what is it?" to which that has been met with "Could be this, or that, maybe, who knows" and even shoulder shrugging.

BB's theory has never been about the why, been about the how. Which is why I have seen on here a big misinterpretation of his views. Asking why in my opinion will just lead you to do your head in thinking about it. It seems if we can ask the why and not just accept the how that there must be alternative theories that go against the how. So essentially how we came to be is a bigger mystery than the ill fated meaning of life.

I don't think this debate can really go any further beyond the repetition seen over the last 5 pages!

Funny how you and Amri feel the need to "defend" and further interpret BB.

Like we all can't see it for ourselves.

The reason it got over 9 pages is because BB can't extract himself from his own limited corner he has boxed himself in, so he keeps repeating the same louder and louder.

As for Indiana Jones, I am sure rotla has seen it, I haven't.
And a bit of thin ice starting to quote hollywood films as sources of wisdom.

Esp as they are wrong...meant to be wrong and brainwash.

How is it defending? All I've seen from you on this subject is random quoting as mere attempt to bluff.

The line from the film is a great paradox to what is the underlining tone to this debate. Not brainwash as you keep generically spouting.

legendkillar

Posts : 1926
Join date : 2012-10-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by noleisthebest on Mon Nov 06, 2017 2:08 pm

LK,

Science fanatics are as bad as feminists or any other fanatics.

Often hiding insecurities or some fears.

But it's all human.

noleisthebest

Posts : 25119
Join date : 2012-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by legendkillar on Mon Nov 06, 2017 2:10 pm

Tenez wrote:
legendkillar wrote:
How this is has reached 9 pages is beyond me. All I've seen is a reputable theory put out there and it being canned with maybes. That's essentially been it. Random waffle! Alternative thinking put out there with zero application or understanding.

The best paradox I can offer came from one of my favourite films: Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade. Anyone seen it? If so, remember near the beginning when Indiana Jones summarized beautifully Archeology when he stated it was the search for facts and that if it's truth you want, go to philosophy class. Basically saying Fact and Truth and mutually exclusive of one and another. And that's exactly what science and faith. Science is about the how and not about the why. I have seen BB's thinking around the how and all I've seen counter that is "Not that simple" which has been met with "Ah ok, then what is it?" to which that has been met with "Could be this, or that, maybe, who knows" and even shoulder shrugging.

BB's theory has never been about the why, been about the how. Which is why I have seen on here a big misinterpretation of his views. Asking why in my opinion will just lead you to do your head in thinking about it. It seems if we can ask the why and not just accept the how that there must be alternative theories that go against the how. So essentially how we came to be is a bigger mystery than the ill fated meaning of life.

I don't think this debate can really go any further beyond the repetition seen over the last 5 pages!
But BB says there is no why. This very approach which is completely unscientific and as fundamentally based on his faith of "Science Akbar" (or the Golden Vault but he does not understand the analogy). Cause even in the hows, there are whys (reasons and purpose). Understanding how feelings work scientifically for instance, does not make those feelings any more deader! When Darwin lost his daughter, did he tell himself, how that was just a broken machine, I can't care less as I am a machine myself? The roller coaster of life, and I believe you know a bit of it yourself, is as real as the atoms and energies sustaining it. It is only fair to question science further to get more answers. But apparently, not BB...he knows it all!


Or in his mind no need to ask the why in the first place Winking

Largely depends on the "how" one accepts before saying the rest is unquantifiable which is where the mystery lie.

I have to say I always found the big bang theory amusing as that felt at times are more generic headline than a god Laugh 

The "why" for me will just cause inner conflict (well with me for the large part because of my personality) and whilst I feel science explains a lot, it can never explain all. I don't think we'll ever get the bottom of the true beginning. It's 4 billion years worth of catch up and that gap grows with each passing day Winking

legendkillar

Posts : 1926
Join date : 2012-10-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by legendkillar on Mon Nov 06, 2017 2:15 pm

noleisthebest wrote:LK,

Science fanatics are as bad as feminists or any other fanatics.

Often hiding insecurities or some fears.

But it's all human.

All fanatics are bad if they are driven by the will to impose. Regardless of subject matter.

It's the frustration that others don't subscribe or accept those views.

Take your Anti-Nadal views on the forum. I see the impatience and disbelief in your posts when people actually prefer Nadal to Federer.

Compromise is lost on fanatics. If anything, I think it's more human to compromise.

legendkillar

Posts : 1926
Join date : 2012-10-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This Is What A Feminist Looks Like

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 9 of 12 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum