Scientism

[Cypress]

Like I said, animals have an understanding of justice and equality. There may be an understanding of what we call freedom but, due to a lack of complex language, they can't express it. For all I know, there has been evidence of animals showing an understanding of freedom, just as they have shown an understanding of fairness or lack of fairness. There was an experiment where two chimpanzees, I believe, were given two different size piles of food and the chimp that received that smaller amount showed obvious unhappiness.

Justice is more than just punishment or sanction for crimes and social transgressions.

Freedom is more than just the ability to move about the environment without constraint.

That is exactly why humans have had the long debate looking to the philosophies of Socrates, Jesus, Confucious, Ghandi, Marx, Lao Tzu.


The concept that everything can be explained physically by scientific law and maths is a philosophical and metaphysical viewpoint which I believe even few scientists agree with. Some even think it's hubris to believe that the maths and experiments our chimpanzee brains can come up with give us direct access to all the answers, to all true knowledge and understanding

 

[Cypress]

IMO, that's exactly the difference between our animalistic base nature and using our ability to think in a greater dimension. Some people think bigger, but that's not common. Most people just want to spank their monkeys in the base material things you mentioned.

That's more Boomer stuff: "He who dies with the most toys, wins!"

I'm still curious if the Millennials become the 21st century's Greatest Generation because of all the shit Boomers are doing. LOL

In another thread the discussion was how "whites" will become a minority in the US by 2050. My response is that it will be like the Great Manure Crisis of 1894 and become a non-event because Millennials know "race" is a social construct and is a psycho-social problem, not a genetic one. They will have grown past their racist Boomer grandpas and a few grannies.

Maybe, by 2050, they'll have out grown people like #45.

Aristotle thought living the contemplative life was humanity's highest gift. Confucious thought it was a lifelong project to transcend the basic and rudimentary instict and cultivate a higher consciousness. There are plenty of humans who only exercise the part of the brain that responds to material comfort, ego, food, sex. A lot of them are MAGAs. There are dolphins who are more emotionally advanced compared to that type of shallow existence.

I think you're right that race, religion, skin tone will become less important as the old farts and MAGAs die off. At least I hope so.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Aristotle thought living the contemplative life was humanity's highest gift. Confucious thought it was a lifelong project to transcend the basic and rudimentary instict and cultivate a higher consciousness. There are plenty of humans who only exercise the part of the brain that responds to material comfort, ego, food, sex. A lot of them are MAGAs. There are dolphins who are more emotionally advanced compared to that type of shallow existence.

I think you're right that race, religion, skin tone will become less important as the old farts and MAGAs die off. At least I hope so.

MAGAs fear the change, because for cowards, change is scary. Millennials are living the change so it doesn't scare them at all.

Back in the day there were fears of how television violence would program a generation of killers and that computers would take over government. Gays feared genetic research on sexual preference fearing that, given a choice, parents would make their kids straight. While there is truth in many such fears, they are never as bad or as powerful as we create them in our own minds.

Living a contemplative life and aspiring to a higher understanding of existence is a great goal. Unfortunately, it's usually only attainable to intelligent, educated and/or very centered people. Fearful people will never get there.

 

[Ross Dolan]

It's really not mythology. Our subjective experience completely aligns with what I'm saying and, therefore, supports the reality of determinism.

Do you have any idea what you're going to think next? Can you stop your next thought from appearing in consciousness? Do you have the ability to know what you're going to think before you think it?

The answer to all of those questions is no, yet our thoughts literally determine everything about us that isn't determined by genetics. Our thoughts determine if we speak up in a meeting or don't. They determine what our goals are and when we believe we've met them. Our thoughts determine if we give the finger to the guy who cut us off. They determine every intention we have. They determine our capacity for working hard or not and overcoming obstacles or not.

Are you actually suggesting that if free-will existed rather than determinism...we would know what next thought will pop up in our mind? That we will not think before we act?

Each of the things you mentioned as indicators of determinism...could also be used as part of the free-will processes.

Frankly, I do not know if free-will exists...or if all has been predetermined. But I do feel that humans seem to place WAY TOO HIGH an esteem for humans and their minds than any logic dictates that they should. We humans are merely the CURRENTLY most advanced life form on the planet we call Earth. Earth is a relatively tiny speck of dust circling a relatively non-descript star spiraling in a relatively non-descript galaxy among hundred of billions of other known galaxies...in what might easily be a relatively non-descript universe.

We are as close to nothing as possible...and still be "something."

To suggest we even know appropriate questions to ask, let alone know the answers to those questions, is an absurdity.

There is no way we can know (or seriously calculate) any of the variables that comprise us. Anyone insisting that it must be this way or that...is being farcical.

Or at least that is the way I guess on this issue.

 

[ZenMode]

This is from Bertrand Russell, "“both mind and matter are composed of a neutral-stuff which, in isolation, is neither mental nor material” (Russell 1921: 25).
This is called neutral monism.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/neutral-monism/#BertRuss


Does not matter what you call it. Russell is right, there really is not a distinction between body and mind. They are just types.

I don't think I disagree with that, but I also don't see how that relates or changes the reality of how our brains work related to the illusion of there being a "self".

 

[BidenPresident]

I don't think I disagree with that, but I also don't see how that relates or changes the reality of how our brains work related to the illusion of there being a "self".

I was never talking about a self. That was only something you kept referring to. Nor did I say the brain does not do anything.

 

[ZenMode]

Are you actually suggesting that if free-will existed rather than determinism...we would know what next thought will pop up in our mind? That we will not think before we act?

Each of the things you mentioned as indicators of determinism...could also be used as part of the free-will processes.

Frankly, I do not know if free-will exists...or if all has been predetermined. But I do feel that humans seem to place WAY TOO HIGH an esteem for humans and their minds than any logic dictates that they should. We humans are merely the CURRENTLY most advanced life form on the planet we call Earth. Earth is a relatively tiny speck of dust circling a relatively non-descript star spiraling in a relatively non-descript galaxy among hundred of billions of other known galaxies...in what might easily be a relatively non-descript universe.

We are as close to nothing as possible...and still be "something."

To suggest we even know appropriate questions to ask, let alone know the answers to those questions, is an absurdity.

There is no way we can know (or seriously calculate) any of the variables that comprise us. Anyone insisting that it must be this way or that...is being farcical.

Or at least that is the way I guess on this issue.

Right, I'm basically saying that, based on the reality that there is no self that exists independently of our stream of consciousness, that would create or moderate our thoughts, there's no reason to believe that we have free will. Our thoughts just show up in consciousness and it is our thoughts that determine basically everything that makes us us. Every decision, every intention and every action is based on our thoughts, but we can't prevent thoughts from showing up and we have no idea what they are going to be until they show up.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Right, I'm basically saying that, based on the reality that there is no self that exists independently of our stream of consciousness, that would create or moderate our thoughts, there's no reason to believe that we have free will. Our thoughts just show up in consciousness and it is our thoughts that determine basically everything that makes us us. Every decision, every intention and every action is based on our thoughts, but we can't prevent thoughts from showing up and we have no idea what they are going to be until they show up.

Programmable meat robots are cool. Who does your programming?

If you say it's self-generated by the individual, you're getting closer to the truth. You are pushing determinism, that people only respond to their programming. I'm saying, however limited, that each human being has a spark of individuality. That's Free Will. You are still responsible for your choices. You can't blame it on "the Man" or some other bullshit excuse.

OTOH, simplifying billions of people down to meat robots makes it easier to kill them. Nukes are bad for everyone. Any disease with a 98% fatality rate for the unvaccinated would quickly separate the Smart from the Stupid and the North from the South. It would also solve the global warming problem. Silver lining!

Blast from the past:

 

[ZenMode]

Programmable meat robots are cool. Who does your programming?

If you say it's self-generated by the individual, you're getting closer to the truth. You are pushing determinism, that people only respond to their programming. I'm saying, however limited, that each human being has a spark of individuality. That's Free Will. You are still responsible for your choices. You can't blame it on "the Man" or some other bullshit excuse.

OTOH, simplifying billions of people down to meat robots makes it easier to kill them. Nukes are bad for everyone. Any disease with a 98% fatality rate for the unvaccinated would quickly separate the Smart from the Stupid and the North from the South. It would also solve the global warming problem. Silver lining!

Blast from the past:

Our programming, as you call it, is a combination of genetics and our environment. Our environment/life experiences are what determine the neurological sculpting of our brains. That sculpting is what makes us primarily who we are and ultimately determines our thoughts. Our thoughts determine basically everything that we do.

The individuality that you are referring to is just what it feels like to experience our unique stream of consciousness and thoughts. We don't determine the contents of our consciousness and thoughts, but we experience it. That is what makes us believe there is a self sitting somewhere behind our eyes.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Right, I'm basically saying that, based on the reality that there is no self that exists independently of our stream of consciousness, that would create or moderate our thoughts, there's no reason to believe that we have free will. Our thoughts just show up in consciousness and it is our thoughts that determine basically everything that makes us us. Every decision, every intention and every action is based on our thoughts, but we can't prevent thoughts from showing up and we have no idea what they are going to be until they show up.

ZM...you are having a lot of trouble simply acknowledging that we do not know if free will (and its implications) exists...or if, as you are supposing, everything is predetermined and that "no self...exists independently of our stream of consciousness."

Now don't get me wrong. It is possible that your guess about the REALITY may be correct...spot on. Of course, that implies that your guess may be totally wrong.

We do not know.

The REALITY of existence may be (probably is) as far from human ability to discern and/or understand as planets in the Andromeda galaxy are from us physically.

There is plenty of evidence. EVERYTHING that exists is evidence of something. We just do not know "of what."

The "evidence" you gave to advance your guess IS evidence, but it cannot be asserted to be evidence of what you suggest it to be. We humans may have free-will...in whatever sense that is meant to mean. Your assertions to the contrary never get past the "assertion" stage.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Our programming, as you call it, is a combination of genetics and our environment. Our environment/life experiences are what determine the neurological sculpting of our brains. That sculpting is what makes us primarily who we are and ultimately determines our thoughts. Our thoughts determine basically everything that we do.

The individuality that you are referring to is just what it feels like to experience our unique stream of consciousness and thoughts. We don't determine the contents of our consciousness and thoughts, but we experience it. That is what makes us believe there is a self sitting somewhere behind our eyes.

IOW, determinism. Your choices are not your fault because you make no choices. You are only a meat robot responding to adaptive genetic programming. Sorry, but I continue to disagree.

You have choices. Every criminal conviction in our courts supports that concept.

The "sitting behind the eyes" is mostly a Western concept. That we are little people inside our heads manipulating a puppet body. Easterners see our body as a whole not as a separate part of us.

A western child will ask their parents "How was I made?" but an eastern child will ask "How was I grown?"* It's a different perspective on the same thing: how an individual relates to the rest of the Universe.

*Alan Watts

https://truthaparadox.wordpress.com/2009/12/15/three-models-of-the-universe/
Three Models of the Universe

3.) The Organic Model – The Universe as organism.

This is the view that Alan Watts pulled from a Chinese worldview. Watts usually starts his discussion on this model by saying that the Chinese don’t see their lives/souls as coming ‘in to’ the world, but rather ‘out of’ the world. For example, a common question that a western child will ask her parents is, “Mommy, how was I made?” A Chinese child would not ask, “How was I made?” But, she might as her mother, “How was I grown?” This is the view that I believe Alan Watts held for a majority of his later years.

Watts would say that the same way an apple tree “apples” (as a verb), the universe “peoples”. Everything we see, hear, touch and taste has come out of the world – not in to it. It is assumed that when people believe that their ‘self’ was cast in to a human body on this earth, they see the unsatisfactory events in life as being unfair. They didn’t choose this life. Nobody asked them if they wanted to be born. But when if we believe that we are in fact a part of the world, coming forth from it, we are motivated to work with the ways of the world (what the Taoist calls establishing Wu-Wei). Realizing the interdependence of the whole Universe, we are able to see where we fit in it and how to work with it.

 

[BidenPresident]

We don't determine the contents of our consciousness and thoughts, but we experience it.

Don't people make decisions about what to think about? Like planning what to have for lunch and going to the grocery store to buy food.

 

[ZenMode]

IOW, determinism. Your choices are not your fault because you make no choices. You are only a meat robot responding to adaptive genetic programming. Sorry, but I continue to disagree.

You have choices. Every criminal conviction in our courts supports that concept.

An understanding that we don't have free will doesn't mean there are no consequences and accountability for actions, it just removes the feelings of hatred. If you lost an arm in a bear attack, you'd probably think "Duh. It's a bear. Bears are going to do bear things." If you lost an arm to a axe welding psychopath, you'd believe that he/she had a choice and would probably feel hatred for what they did to you, even though neither had a choice in what they did. In the case of the bear or psycho, there would be action taken to ensure neither could hurt anyone else.

The "sitting behind the eyes" is mostly a Western concept. That we are little people inside our heads manipulating a puppet body. Easterners see our body as a whole not as a separate part of us.

A western child will ask their parents "How was I made?" but an eastern child will ask "How was I grown?"* It's a different perspective on the same thing: how an individual relates to the rest of the Universe.

*Alan Watts

https://truthaparadox.wordpress.com/2009/12/15/three-models-of-the-universe/
Three Models of the Universe

However you perceive it, we believe there is a self that is authoring thoughts,

 

[Dutch Uncle]

An understanding that we don't have free will doesn't mean there are no consequences and accountability for actions, it just removes the feelings of hatred. If you lost an arm in a bear attack, you'd probably think "Duh. It's a bear. Bears are going to do bear things." If you lost an arm to a axe welding psychopath, you'd believe that he/she had a choice and would probably feel hatred for what they did to you, even though neither had a choice in what they did. In the case of the bear or psycho, there would be action taken to ensure neither could hurt anyone else.


However you perceive it, we believe there is a self that is authoring thoughts,

Everyone has the right of self-defense regardless if it's from a meat robot, a bear or a human being with Free Will. All active threats should be neutralized regardless if it has free will or not.

Dude, a "self authoring thoughts" is free will. Are you authoring or simply responding like a plant to sunlight?

 

[ZenMode]

Don't people make decisions about what to think about? Like planning what to have for lunch and going to the grocery store to buy food.

If you really pay attention, you'll realize that you are constantly talking to yourself aka thinking, but you have no idea what your next thought is going to be because you can't think it until it shows up in consciousness. You can be at work, watching TV or golfing and suddenly think "Shoot, we need dog food." and you literally have no idea why that thought suddenly showed up in consciousness and you are powerless to stop it. If you're working and have a thought about lunch, from your perspective, it came out of nowhere, almost like someone whispered it in your ear. If you're trying to decide where to eat lunch, you're thinking about different names of restaurants... McDonald's, Chili's, Arby's....the names just appear in consciousness, but you have no idea why THOSE specific names appear and not Pizza Hut.

Do you have free will to pick a restaurant if the name doesn't occur to you to pick?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

If you really pay attention, you'll realize that you are constantly talking to yourself aka thinking, but you have no idea what your next thought is going to be because you can't think it until it shows up in consciousness. You can be at work, watching TV or golfing and suddenly think "Shoot, we need dog food." and you literally have no idea why that thought suddenly showed up in consciousness and you are powerless to stop it. If you're working and have a thought about lunch, from your perspective, it came out of nowhere, almost like someone whispered it in your ear. If you're trying to decide where to eat lunch, you're thinking about different names of restaurants... McDonald's, Chili's, Arby's....the names just appear in consciousness, but you have no idea why THOSE specific names appear and not Pizza Hut.

Do you have free will to pick a restaurant if the name doesn't occur to you to pick?

There's a lot of brain behind your conscious thoughts. It's called your subconscious. It's largely non-verbal, very visual and, to my knowledge, never sleeps. It's what wakes you up when there's a noise at night. It's the source of your dreams.

Thomas Edison used Lucid Dreaming (hypnagogic state) for ideas; the twilight zone between sleep and full consciousness. https://www.webmd.com/sleep-disorders/lucid-dreams-overview
It's a means to connect with the rest of your brain. The part most people aren't aware they have; their subconscious. Intuition is another term for it.

We are more than meat robots and plants reacting to sunlight.

Yes, you can choose to Google "Restaurants near me" or the old-fashioned way, use a phone book.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Scientism: Unlike the use of the scientific method as only one mode of reaching knowledge, scientism claims that science alone can render truth about the world and reality. Scientism's single-minded adherence to only the empirical, or testable, makes it a strictly scientifc worldview. Scientism sees it necessary to do away with most, if not all, metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims, as the truths they proclaim cannot be apprehended by the scientific method. In essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth.

Scientism is the opinion that science and the scientific method are the best or only way to render truth about the world and reality.


https://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/...ke the use of the,about the world and reality.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism

So on could say it's a "religion" of sorts....as one has faith that all will be known through science.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

So on could say it's a "religion" of sorts....as one has faith that all will be known through science.

A bit.

Mostly they are strict realists who see science as the only path to greater knowledge. Yes, they have faith science will reveal all, but they only accept scientific fact.

 

[Cypress]

So on could say it's a "religion" of sorts....as one has faith that all will be known through science.

I think scientism has largely been discredited. Except by those who have an abiding faith that all true knowledge and the answers to everything are accessible by higher mathmatics and particle physics, and that our souped up chimpanzee brains even know the right questions to ask.

 

[Cypress]

Everyone has the right of self-defense regardless if it's from a meat robot, a bear or a human being with Free Will. All active threats should be neutralized regardless if it has free will or not.

Dude, a "self authoring thoughts" is free will. Are you authoring or simply responding like a plant to sunlight?

I don't see why it matters if thoughts and decisions bubble up through our subconscious nanoseconds before they enter our conscious thoughts. I don't see how that supposedly proves we are meat robots or automotons . I was under the understanding that ever since Freud, the subconscious was considered part of our personality and individuality; that the subconscious is shaped by experience and knowledge just like the active conciousness is.


P.S. there was a good band in the 1990s called Meat Puppets.