Discussion in 'Spam....' started by Turambar, Feb 23, 2014.
I can laugh about it now because it didn't burst on me, but I was so silly at the time. I'm one of those idiots who confuses manhood with not ever going to the doctors. After three days where I went from "this feels kind of weird", to "I'm going to faint" and finally googling "appendix" to see exactly where it resides in my body and confirming my suspicions... and after all that I still went into work as if I was going to make it through another twelve hour shift! If I could just make it to the next day it was my weekend and then I'd get myself to the ER. Thank goodness I have coworkers who care more about me than I care about myself, they threatened me into going to the Emergency Room.
They didn't even bother doing a MRI... "take your clothes off sir we're wheeling you into surgery".
Men and their weird ideas...
Yep... definitely closer kin to Apes than God.
As long as I don't win a Darwin Award I'll still feel pretty good about myself.
Well at least without your appendix you're still ineligible for a Darwin award because you're still alive, aren't you?
I’ll have to look them up when I’m done the book I’m reading now.
That’s how I feel about it too. However someone arrives at a mental decision to live in social harmony with others is largely irrelevant to me. Whether an individual is motivated to do it by emotions like compassion, a logical mental process arguing for it as an adaptation for the survival of our species or by believing in God as an autonomous force or being that is a proactive force for social harmony, or for all 3 reasons at once, essentially amounts to the same thing as far as I’m concerned.
Mine is just another way of resolving the problem of different perceptions, Oddy, albeit an unfamiliar one. It’s the result of not believing there can be only one right answer. There is no possible way to prove which person has the “right” perception when 2 people disagree, so why would I try? With 7 billion people in the world, each with their own unique perception, it doesn’t even seem rational to me that there could possibly be only one. To me it makes more sense to assume that we’re all delusional (and that is normal...lol) but that our “delusions” can affect the world around us through our beliefs and so we are responsible for them. My “demon” example was an extreme one to illustrate how powerful belief can be in a practical sense. The take home message for me with that understanding is this: be careful what you believe in because beliefs aren’t always harmless.
This way of looking at it has presented me with a problem though:
My almost 7 year old daughter is afraid of zombies. She tells me that they “hurt her when she’s sleeping” and she’s terrified to go to sleep at night by herself. As her mother, I recognize the inherent danger in allowing her to bring these things into her reality. She might decide they’re chasing her and run out of the house in the middle of the night. If nobody chanced to hear her run out the door she might freeze to death outside. I’ve even experienced the danger of her belief in them personally. She fell asleep downstairs on the couch one Saturday night and I went to pick her up to carry her to bed. She freaked right out, and I do mean freaked. She mistook me for a zombie and actually attacked me in self defense. All I could do was try and defend myself while trying not to drop her on her head and yell: “It’s Mommy! It’s Mommy! For God’s sake you’re safe! NOW STOP IT!”
Good grief! My child doesn’t know yet how to deal with her consciousness and how could she possibly understand anything that abstract at her age? She already believes in the damn zombies or she wouldn’t be afraid of them. They affect her behaviour and that affects her well-being and that of her family around her. (Owwww! Who would have thought that a 6 year old kid could hit that hard?!!?!?)
How do I explain to her about the power of belief and what it means? The short answer: I can’t. She isn’t developmentally ready for that conversation. Heck, she’s still figuring out the world that her five senses can perceive so teaching her how to deal with her abstract perceptions will just have to wait. In the meantime, I have a problem: I don't want zombies in my house or in my daughter’s life)! lol To solve my problem and to keep my daughter safe, I do what generations of mothers before me have done when faced with the same problem: she trusts me so I convince her that my perception is the right one. I look her in the eye and say to her: “Zombies aren’t real.” Currently, it’s only her trust in my lack of belief that keeps the zombies at bay. It’s why she still crawls into my bed sometimes in the night (*rolls eyes*) because she knows that the zombies can’t follow her there. One day (soon I hope!) she’ll convince herself that they don’t exist for her too and she’ll be much better off.
The problem that I see with this approach is that I’m already indoctrinating my child to disregard her perceptions and I’m teaching her that believing in those of other people (especially authority figures) is “right”. When she’s a child, this makes sense because she isn’t yet capable of understanding some things and she needs me to simplify them for her. In other words: she needs a little help to know which things in her reality are detrimental to her. I don't let her play with sharp things and I sure don't want her to play with zombies either. If this type of instruction continues when she’s an adult though, it only means that I’m teaching her that she can’t trust her own judgement. The older I get, the more I think that “blind faith” is a bad idea. I see it everywhere: celebrities marketing perfume and cosmetics, political campaigns, people mustering others who think the same as they do to try and bully other people into agreeing... and the list goes on. I try not to take anyone’s “word for it”. I think about their perspective and try to understand it. Then I try to compare it to my own observations of reality. If it fits and it seems like it would be beneficial, I’ll choose to put my faith in it.
God never forced me to believe and neither did science. Both of them essentially called out, “Here I am, what do you think?” Just because I believe in one doesn’t mean I can’t believe in the other either. In fact, once I put them together, my observations of the world make even more sense to me than they ever did when I believed only in what science could tell me. Half (or more) of the picture was always missing and unexplained in those days so I ignored the questions I had about it, trusting in science to tell me eventually. I guess I got tired of waiting for answers that might never come in my lifetime. I have never, ever known the two types of knowledge to disagree since I started paying attention to “the other side”, not even once. For me, they’re inextricably intertwined. It does not surprise me in the least to have science speculate that the multiverse theory is possible. It will not surprise me in the least if consciousness turns out to be tied to the body but is also capable of operating independently without it. It will not surprise me in the least if it turns out that quantum mechanics is affected by consciousness (ie: the role of the “observer” in the Shrodinger’s cat experiment turns out to be part (or all) of the translation factor between the “quantum” world and the “classical” one). Unbelievably (to me at least, having come from an atheistic background), religion seems to be waiting for science to catch up in this regard. It seems to me that it already predicts these things if you examine it from a metaphorical perspective rather than a literal one.
I do ask because of the multiverse theory. I have to wonder if that might be why 7 billion people have 7 billion different perceptions and why there doesn’t seem to be just one reality (or universe) that our consciousnesses (is that a word? ) all exist in simultaneously. The role of the “observer” in the Shrodinger’s cat experiment comes into question once again. This is why I think physics needs to get working on consciousness and how it interacts with quantum mechanics.
Sure they do, and why not? For those people that perceive God as an autonomous being or consciousness because of experiences they’ve had, that makes perfect sense. Who am I to say those experiences were either “real” or “false”? I wasn’t “there”, so how the heck would I know whether it was a rational decision to “believe” in them or not? Whether I’ve had similar ones personally or not is irrelevant to my way of thinking: the beliefs those people place in them will affect their behaviour and that makes them an observation in my reality as well. I can’t just dismiss them as false and then disregard them, because that would be ignoring the evidence.
I don’t understand how you think that free will/human subjectivity would not be affected if there was only one absolute reality (as predicted by physics for example) out there. One absolute reality ( theoretically: 100% scientific proof of “the truth” or “the way things are”) means forcing all of those perspectives into being one and the same because all other possibilities have been proven incorrect. Doing that takes the freedom of belief/individual choice in possibilities right out of the equation by definition. How can we imagine something (like a car for example) and then bring it into existence by building it if we can’t imagine the possibility of it in the first place? We can’t see it with our eyes before we build it and not everybody is capable of seeing it mentally before it’s built. The builder also needs to believe that it might work before there is motivation to try building it. Not everybody is going to believe it will work before they see it on the road either. We’re right back to the same problem of disagreements between the perceptions of different people and the same concept can be applied to anything that is abstract, not just things we can build. I’m trying to understand your way of reconciling this observation with the idea of only one reality; maybe try explaining it in a different way? Maybe we’re dealing with different definitions of the term “free will”?
Separate names with a comma.