| BookTalk.org News |
| • Only 4 members are currently signed up to receive email digests. Click on the digests link on the right at the top of every page to learn more. This is a great feature for keeping updated on forum activity. |
| • Regular casual chats are back on the menu! Check out the calendar for the schedule. |
| Featured Videos |
Dan Barker
author of "Godless"
talks about his deconversion

Andrew Bacevich
"The Limits of Power"

More Videos
|
| Amazon Honor System |
|
| Donate to BookTalk.org |
Please support BookTalk.org by making a small donation today!
•
Who supports us?
|
| Show us where you live! |
 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Mr. Pessimistic  Professor Silver Contributor


Usergroups: None
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
   
Posts: 3522
Thanks Given: 5 Received: 6 in 6 Posts
Gender: 
Location: NJ - www.myspace.com/mrpessimistic

|
Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 10:39 pm Post subject: Re: Creationism vs. Evolution - A Culture Divided
|
|
|
Actually, the "Survival of the Fittest" is a name that has become synonymous with Darwinian evolution, but it is not the 'jist' of the field at all. "Fit" is a very relative term. It was actually coined by Herbert Spencer.
Quote: Survival of the fittest A better way of expressing this idea is “survival of the fit enough.” Portraying nature as “red in tooth and claw,” wherein living things always engage in a life-or-death struggle against competitors grossly oversimplifies what is really going on. Many life forms get by for eons by existing in niches that other organisms are not suited for. For example, brine shrimp live in water that is unsuitable for potential aquatic enemies, and they apparently have no significant competitors for food.
From berkeley.edu
This phrase is abused by creationists who try to discredit evolutionary theory as a tautology.
Genes are best thought as passed down in populations, as it applies to the evolving of a species. Genes are passed on as hard wired mechanisms and are not what passes on aquired traits. It is the interaction of the genotype and the phenotype in a specific environment that determines the ultimate 'flavor' of the organism. This is called the 'norm of reaction'. (Mayr - What Evolution Is.) Thus, a strong leader is not the result of his/her genes.
I am no authority and my statement may be off, but I think homosexuality, as with all other personality traits, may be the result of this.
And I do not think it is 'wrong' or 'the work of Satan'. Just wanted to make that clear.
Mr. P.
The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Mr. Pessimistic  Professor Silver Contributor


Usergroups: None
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
   
Posts: 3522
Thanks Given: 5 Received: 6 in 6 Posts
Gender: 
Location: NJ - www.myspace.com/mrpessimistic

|
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2004 3:06 pm Post subject: Re: Do you believe in Chod?
|
|
|
hee...well I just have plain old fun hearing some of the things they say!
Mr. P. The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.
I came to get down, I came to get down. So get out ya seat and jump around - House of Pain |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
PeterDF  Freshman
Usergroups: None
Joined: 07 Jul 2003
    
Posts: 214
Thanks Given: 0 Received: 0 in 0 Posts
Gender: 
|
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2004 5:58 pm Post subject: Re: Do you believe in Chod?
|
|
|
Quote: Do you think that instinct still plays a role in the human species?
Yes I do think that instinctive behaviour is common in humans. I agree with Jeremy that Steven Pinker's book, "The Blank Slate" is hugely important in understanding human behaviour. I also saw Pinker give his lecture about the book, and I can't recommend it highly enough.
To give my take on this, I think instinctive behaviour forms a class of behaviours, which we variously call intuitive, subjective and emotional. I think rational behaviour is very different and is perhaps a different mental module (Evolutionary psychologists like Pinker see the mind as being composed of a massive number of modules). I also would add that all instinctive behaviour is innately predisposed. Think about love. Could you teach someone how to fall in love? Of course not! Or minds are in some way, not yet understood, genetically designed to experience instinctive behaviours like love.
The effect of instinctive behaviour is impossible to overstate. I came up with a thought experiment, which I put in my book to illustrate this point. I don't know if I've outlined this on Booktalk before. If you've seen it before sorry for being repetitive. The thought experiment goes like this:
Imagine a man with no emotional or subjective experience and imagine him waking up one morning. Why would he get up? He would not be driven to eat, to work or do anything else. Whether he lived or died would be a matter of complete disinterest to him, even pain would not bother him because the only way we know that pain is unpleasant is through our subjective judgement. So our morning riser would never rise he would lie there until he died. The only reason we do anything is because we feel it is worth doing. So all human motivation is rooted in subjective experience. (This must also, obviously, be true of other related animals)
Rational behaviour can be seen as a tool that we use to maximise "good" and minimise "bad" feeling. But note that, in humans, the two systems are interdependent; in less complex animals this might not be so clear cut. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
RickU Junior
Usergroups: None
Joined: 30 Jun 2004
   
Posts: 311
Thanks Given: 0 Received: 0 in 0 Posts
Gender: 
|
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2004 6:08 pm Post subject: Re: Do you believe in Chod?
|
|
|
| Indeed. One could cite hormonal swings in Men and Women as an example...or that babies, with no objective experience, have much the same reaction or expected reaction to various stimuli..or in fact that babies perceive pain, as pain, at all. In Vino Veritas |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jeremy1952  Doctorate Bronze Contributor

Usergroups: None
Joined: 27 Oct 2002
     
Posts: 583
Thanks Given: 0 Received: 0 in 0 Posts
Gender: 
Location: Saint Louis
|
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2004 9:40 pm Post subject: Re: Do you believe in Chod?
|
|
|
PeterDFQuote: Imagine a man with no emotional or subjective experience and imagine him waking up one morning. Why would he get up? He would not be driven to eat, to work or do anything else. Whether he lived or died would be a matter of complete disinterest to him, even pain would not bother him because the only way we know that pain is unpleasant is through our subjective judgement. So our morning riser would never rise he would lie there until he died. The only reason we do anything is because we feel it is worth doing. So all human motivation is rooted in subjective experience. (This must also, obviously, be true of other related animals)
This case is not entirely hypothetical. In Descartes’ Error, Damasio describes patients with frontal lobe damage who specifically loose the ability to care about the effects they cause. The typical patient can tell you in exact detail all the bad things that are going to happen if he doesn’t complete tasks at work; and then he wanders away leaving them undone anyway. If you make yourself really small, you can externalize virtually everything. Daniel Dennett, 1984 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Mr. Pessimistic  Professor Silver Contributor


Usergroups: None
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
   
Posts: 3522
Thanks Given: 5 Received: 6 in 6 Posts
Gender: 
Location: NJ - www.myspace.com/mrpessimistic

|
Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2004 8:25 am Post subject: Re: Do you believe in Chod?
|
|
|
PeterDF:
Quote: even pain would not bother him
Pain hurts. No matter our subjective judgement. It is a physical thing. How could pain not hurt no matter what?
Mr. P. The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.
I came to get down, I came to get down. So get out ya seat and jump around - House of Pain |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
PeterDF  Freshman
Usergroups: None
Joined: 07 Jul 2003
    
Posts: 214
Thanks Given: 0 Received: 0 in 0 Posts
Gender: 
|
Posted: Sun Aug 01, 2004 4:38 am Post subject: Re: Do you believe in Chod?
|
|
|
jeremy
You are right there is a condition called akinetic morphism, which occurs when a patient suffers damage to a part of the brain called the Cingulate Cortex. It leaves the sufferer conscious but completely lacking the urge to say or do anything.
Mr. P
There is some evidence that pain can be experienced without the subjective "feeling" of unpleasantness. In Susan Greenfield's books about the brain she says that hospital patients who are given morphine for pain relief report that the pain is still there but that it just doesn't bother them. I agree that pain is a real mechanism involving signals sent from the affected part to the brain, but the sensation of unpleasantness is experienced in the mind as (as I understand it) a quailia. We don't know how qualia are generated in the brain but it seems that they can be influenced by the action of natural chemicals produced in the limbic system and released into the brain (Greenfield calls this mechanism the amine fountain). These chemicals can be mimicked by opiates like morphine.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Mr. Pessimistic  Professor Silver Contributor


Usergroups: None
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
   
Posts: 3522
Thanks Given: 5 Received: 6 in 6 Posts
Gender: 
Location: NJ - www.myspace.com/mrpessimistic

|
Posted: Sun Aug 01, 2004 8:27 am Post subject: Re: Do you believe in Chod?
|
|
|
Peter:
Thanks for the education...I will be looking into this more as it sounds interesting.
The brain...can't live with it, can't live without it!
Mr. P. The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.
I came to get down, I came to get down. So get out ya seat and jump around - House of Pain |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Mr. Pessimistic  Professor Silver Contributor


Usergroups: None
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
   
Posts: 3522
Thanks Given: 5 Received: 6 in 6 Posts
Gender: 
Location: NJ - www.myspace.com/mrpessimistic

|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
| Recent Topics |
|
|
|