Eastern philosophy says the self is an illusion

[Dutch Uncle]

Cypress seems unaware of all true Christians have The Holy Spirit! It's certainly not unique to Mason!
What sets Mason apart from other Holy Spirit filled Christians is "Many are called few are Chosen"!
Mason is probably the very last person anyone would think would be " Chosen"!!! Which is exactly why Mason Is Chosen!

True Christians take responsibility for their own actions and do not lie about others.

 

[Cypress]

Depending upon the intelligence of the animal, sure they can work to solve a problem. The difference being they don't consider the consequences of each choice. They simply act to satisfy the present.

Consider hogs. They are very intelligent but most of that intelligence is used to gather and consume food. They'll root up fields, work latches, knock down barbed wire fences and so forth, but their goal is simply to eat. They don't think past their next meal. Humans can consider the consequences of starvation versus particular acts like murder, hoarding or starving themselves for the benefit of others then choose to act upon their decision.

Dolphins hate sharks. Saving a human is often coincidence. The dolphins would do the same if it was a seal, a whale calf or a beach ball.


https://wildanimalscentral.com/are-sharks-afraid-of-dolphins/


https://seaworld.com/orlando/blog/10-reasons-sharks-have-dolphin-phobia/
10 Reasons Sharks Have Dolphin-Phobia

The thing that is remarkable to me about human cognition, is there is a distinct possibility we are the only life to have ever existed in the galaxy to be able to think abstractly and transcend ourselves, to pose and deduce fundamental questions about the nature of reality and the meaning of the cosmos.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

The thing that is remarkable to me about human cognition, is there is a distinct possibility we are the only life to have ever existed in the galaxy to be able to think abstractly and transcend ourselves, to pose and deduce fundamental questions about the nature of reality and the meaning of the cosmos.

The evidence indicates you are correct, but given the odds, meaning the number of stars and galaxies, I doubt it's true.

OTOH, it's posible there is only one or two per galaxy. The epiphany you gave me yesterday about Novas at the galactic core explains why it's unlikely there's be advanced life towards the middle of the Milky Way galaxy. As if being near a giant black hole wasn't bad enough. LOL

 

[Saint Guinefort]

The thing that is remarkable to me about human cognition, is there is a distinct possibility we are the only life to have ever existed in the galaxy to be able to think abstractly and transcend ourselves, to pose and deduce fundamental questions about the nature of reality and the meaning of the cosmos.

What a load of horseshit.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

What a load of horseshit.

^^^
What Perry PhD considers to be "intellectual conversation". LOL

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Doc Dutch is a stalker.

Another reason I suspect you lied about being a woman although I'll concede you could be some other form of feminine personality.

FWIW, if I thought you were a man, I wouldn't let such posts stop me from commenting on your posts or your threads. Since I consider you to be a woman, I'm happy to leave you be.

Good luck with your artwork, BP.

 

[Cypress]

The evidence indicates you are correct, but given the odds, meaning the number of stars and galaxies, I doubt it's true.

OTOH, it's posible there is only one or two per galaxy. The epiphany you gave me yesterday about Novas at the galactic core explains why it's unlikely there's be advanced life towards the middle of the Milky Way galaxy. As if being near a giant black hole wasn't bad enough. LOL

Not to mention many galaxies and stellar systems are presumed to be depleted in heavy elements, rendering life basically impossible

I also think if there is no sentient life capable of technology other than us in the Milky Way galaxy, there's no reason to assume we will find it in other galaxies. There are 300 billion star system in the Milky Way, this is a very large galaxy. If intelligence is inevitable or even slightly possible in the presence of water and organic molecules, we should find other civilizations in this galaxy.

 

[BidenPresident]

ASSHOLE DOC DUTCH STALKING AGAIN

WHY EVERYONE HATES THAT JERK

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Not to mention many galaxies and stellar systems are presumed to be depleted in heavy elements, rendering life basically impossible

I also think if there is no sentient life capable of technology other than us in the Milky Way galaxy, there's no reason to assume we will find it in other galaxies. There are 300 billion star system in the Milky Way, this is a very large galaxy. If intelligence is inevitable or even slightly possible in the presence of water and organic molecules, we should find other civilizations in this galaxy.

Given the odds, if life can happen once, I think it can happen again. It's just a matter of the "Perfect Storm". There are many factors against life occurring; Novas, black holes and lack of heavy elements as you mentioned. I'm certain there are others.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Not to mention many galaxies and stellar systems are presumed to be depleted in heavy elements, rendering life basically impossible

Such as?

I also think if there is no sentient life capable of technology other than us in the Milky Way galaxy, there's no reason to assume we will find it in other galaxies. There are 300 billion star system in the Milky Way, this is a very large galaxy. If intelligence is inevitable or even slightly possible in the presence of water and organic molecules, we should find other civilizations in this galaxy.

You have been told how this is not an effective metric. But you didn't listen. Yet you keep on passing it off as if you know something which you don't.

A load of horseshit as usual.

 

[Cypress]

Given the odds, if life can happen once, I think it can happen again. It's just a matter of the "Perfect Storm". There are many factors against life occurring; Novas, black holes and lack of heavy elements as you mentioned. I'm certain there are others.

The universe does seem primed for life.

At least microbial and multicellular life

Sentient intelligence is a question mark for me.

I think one of the keys besides the SETI stuff, is if we can ever understand how inert chemicals self organized into complex self sustaining molecular biology.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Sentient intelligence is a question mark for me.

Truer words never spoken.

I think one of the keys besides the SETI stuff, is if we can ever understand how inert chemicals self organized into complex self sustaining molecular biology.

Do you want to talk chemistry? I bet you don't. I bet you wouldn't be able to handle it.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

The universe does seem primed for life.

At least microbial and multicellular life

Sentient intelligence is a question mark for me.

I think one of the keys besides the SETI stuff, is if we can ever understand how inert chemicals self organized into complex self sustaining molecular biology.

Any life other than Earth would be a monumental discovery. So far, nada.

There's a doctoral thesis in some astronomer mapping out all the dead areas of our galaxy; all of those near a black hole or other high radiation source, within 500 million years of a supernova event, lack of heavy metals and any other basic requirements for carbon-based lifeforms.

 

[Cypress]

Any life other than Earth would be a monumental discovery. So far, nada.

There's a doctoral thesis in some astronomer mapping out all the dead areas of our galaxy; all of those near a black hole or other high radiation source, within 500 million years of a supernova event, lack of heavy metals and any other basic requirements for carbon-based lifeforms.

We can also write off the M class planets, aka red dwarves, which are supposedly the most abundant type of star. Recent research supposedly says they don't put out enough solar radiation to support photosynthesis. It's hard to imagine a thriving ecosystem somehow just not bothering to harness the most reliable and abundant source of energy in the universe.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

We can also write off the M class planets, aka red dwarves, which are supposedly the most abundant type of star. Recent research supposedly says they don't put out enough solar radiation to support photosynthesis. It's hard to imagine a thriving ecosystem somehow just not bothering to harness the most reliable and abundant source of energy in the universe

Good point. Again, having someone put all that data into a computer and project the galactic "dead zones" would go a long way to looking for where the living zones could exist.

 

[ZenMode]

I seriously considered three majors in college, history, economics, science because I was interested in all three. After much deliberate reflection, deliberation, and research I chose one.

Who chose one? What is the "I" you're referring to that was deliberating, considering, weighing pros/cons, etc?

 

[Cypress]

Who chose one? What is the "I" you're referring to that was deliberating, considering, weighing pros/cons, etc?

"I" is a pronoun, maybe even a colloquialism, we use in everyday English.
No-self is a sophisticated religious and philosophical concept used in Buddhism.

Word games aside, my brain chose which action to take. I could have easily chosen history as a major, and I did not feel any forces compelling me to my course of actions.

We do not live in a clockwork universe of simple cause and effect. Attempts to apply the mechanistic laws of Newton and Maxwell to humans do not cut the mustard because human psychology and conciousness is the great unknown of science and philosophy. Using strict reductionism to explain human psychology is getting way out in front of ourselves.

In a very real sense, the clockwork universe itself has not stood the test of time. If nothing else, quantum reality has proven to us that uncertainty is built into the fabric of the universe, and that uncaused causes really do exist.

 

[ZenMode]

"I" is a pronoun, maybe even a colloquialism, we use in everyday English.
No-self is a sophisticated religious and philosophical concept used in Buddhism.

Word games aside, my brain chose which action to take. I could have easily chosen history as a major, and I did not feel any forces compelling me to my course of actions.

We do not live in a clockwork universe of simple cause and effect. Attempts to apply the mechanistic laws of Newton and Maxwell to humans do not cut the mustard because human psychology and conciousness is the great unknown of science and philosophy. Using strict reductionism to explain human psychology is getting way out in front of ourselves.

In a very real sense, the clockwork universe itself has not stood the test of time. If nothing else, quantum reality has proven to us that uncertainty is built into the fabric of the universe, and that uncaused causes really do exist.

Agree on the pronoun comment. We use them because we have to have some method to refer to ourself in complex language.

When you say your brain made the decision. I assume you'd agree, based on past comments, that there is no self that is controlling the process your brain goes through to make a decision, right?

 

[Cypress]

Agree on the pronoun comment. We use them because we have to have some method to refer to ourself in complex language.

When you say your brain made the decision. I assume you'd agree, based on past comments, that there is no self that is controlling the process your brain goes through to make a decision, right?

I am agnostic about the concept of a lasting and persisting self. I think my physical brain is making choices, weighing evidence, and deliberating on courses of action.

Conciousness is a mystery, and it is getting way out in front of ourselves to apply the mechanistic clockwork laws of Newton to human psychology.

It's entirely possible that the origin of human conciousness is found somewhere in quantum reality. And uncertainty and uncaused causes are a fundamental tenet of quantum reality.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I am agnostic about the concept of a lasting and persisting self. I think my physical brain is making choices, weighing evidence, and deliberating on courses of action.

Conciousness is a mystery, and it is getting way out in front of ourselves to apply the mechanistic clockwork laws of Newton to human psychology.

It's entirely possible that the origin of human conciousness is found somewhere in quantum reality. And uncertainty and uncaused causes are a fundamental tenet of quantum reality.

Agreed on the agnostic position regarding "self" as "soul" and also on the normal human ability to have a concept of self and make decisions for themselves, as best they can, using reasoning.

OTOH, I understand why the mentally ill and the low IQ are unable to function in this manner. They often seek to blame others for their own actions. People who refuse to take responsibility for themselves seem to fall can fall into several categories. See examples below.

The bottom line is that, as this thread has demonstrated for weeks now, some people believe they are not responsible for their own thoughts and actions while some people do. I side with those who accept responsibility for my own life.

1. Low self-esteem. They know they are responsible but fear admitting it. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...001/when-someone-won-t-own-their-bad-behavior

For starters, consider that anyone who's particularly insecure and therefore possesses an extremely fragile ego, will—to safeguard their vulnerability—react to a perceived attack defensively. From deep within, they'll feel compelled to deflect all criticism.

2. People who don't believe they can change. https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/why_some_people_own_mistakes_and_others_dont

When you believe that your behavior can change, you are more likely to be willing to admit responsibility. A big reason why you are able to admit fault is that you recognize that once you admit what you have done wrong, you can work to make it better, and so you are not threatened by admitting mistakes. People who do not believe that they can change are stressed by admitting their mistakes, because they believe that those mistakes say something fundamental about who they are as a person.

3. Mental health. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/in-control/201912/mental-health-and-control

It is self-evident that control is important in psychopathology. Psychological distress is experienced when people feel unable to control their thoughts, actions, emotions, or some other aspect of their day to day living. Control has also been recognized as fundamental to health generally. Marmot (2006) describes control as an organizing principle in the social determinants of health. He uses control as a framework to explain inequalities in health within and between countries. He suggests that “control over life circumstances reduces chronic stress and has favorable biological effects.” (Marmot, 2006, p. 565). Crucial to the notion of control is the ability of people to lead lives they have reason to value. “What is important is not so much what you have but what you can do with what you have.” (Marmot, 2006, p. 565).