Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Respecting a belief because it is based on religion?

Options
1246789

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    nagirrac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,019 ✭✭✭nagirrac


    I agree sarky when it comes to evolutionary developmental biology we are making tremendous progress. The pace of discovery is a bit breathtaking, even the concept of the gene has undergone tremendous change in recent years. The big breakthrough was decoding the genome and then the ENCODE project which generated enormous data on how the various segments of DNA interact, regulatory sections for a specific gene being on a different chromosome to the actual gene in question, amazing stuff. What has been the most stunning development in Evo Devo for me is that the gene toolkit for a fly is essentially the same as a human, and this toolkit has been around in largely unchanged form for hundreds of millions of years from a common ancestor of flies and humans.

    The thing is we haven't had such a breakthrough yet when it comes to the mind. In many ways we know no more now about consciousness as in our experience of what it is to be human than we knew 100 years ago, a bit similar to our knowledge of evolution before DNA was discovered. The Descartes model of a mind from some immaterial source within us has been replaced by the brain as that source of mind within us, but I am not sure that brings us any closer to the truth. There is no question the brain is intimately linked to consciousness, but is it creating our conscious experience or responding to our conscious experience?

    I think the environment is the key to the emergence of consciousness, just like in evolution. Without a changing environment there is little reason for biological evolution. It does seem that just as the demands of different environments result in the emergence of different physical traits, mind evolved in much the same way.


  • Options
    #93
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,734 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    smacl wrote: »
    The implication here is that the totality of how the conscious and subconscious mind works can be explained entirely in terms of physiological process. Even if this were true, which requires a rather deterministic view of the universe that I personally don't hold, it is arguable whether it provides much value in many contexts. Science is just a tool for to help us describe what we observe, much as mathematics is a tool for describing what we conceive.
    swampgas wrote: »
    My intuition goes the other way - to me it seems entirely plausible that consciousness is purely a physical process. To suggest that consciousness might depend on something beyond physical processes - something, in effect, supernatural - seems to me to have the bigger burden of proof.

    Bit of a jump from there physiological process to physical process. I think the fact that the conscious mind resides in the brain, and the brain exists (for this purpose) as a vast jumble of connected neurons, does not imply that those neurological connections dictate what goes on in the mind. To provide an analogy, a computer can be thought of as a bunch of transistors connected by copper wires which form physical connections. A computer program is essentially a state machine that runs on a computer, and this program has logical connections and sequences that allow it to work. No amount of work examining the physical connections on the computer will help you understand how any given program on that computer works, and will be of little benefit in writing a new program. Similarly, in my opinion, trying to understand the workings of the mind (as opposed to the brain) by examining neurological pathways is going to be of limited value.

    There is nothing supernatural required in understanding that logical connections in the mind don't correspond directly physical connections in the brain, even if they are entirely dependant on those physical connections in order to function, any more than the logic of a computer program corresponds to the layout of circuitry in a computer.


  • Options
    #94
    Beruthiel
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 42,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Beruthiel


    Sarky wrote: »
    Personally, I think odds are good we'll have gotten a pretty good handle on consciousness within the next 50 years, maybe even creating some within the next 100.

    And instantly I thought of Data. :)


  • Options
    #95
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users Posts: 8,165 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    Something I have noticed often is that people with a religious belief think that if you say anything or ridicule the belief you're a smug atheist asshole or if you are fox news you call it the "war on religion". In a lot of gay marriage debates eventually the person against it gets backed into a corner and runs out of one liners from the bible to use the "well thats just my belief, you people call me a bigot and then you attack me for having a belief that different to yours".

    These people would then laugh at Scientology or claim that Islam should treat women better but nobody else should dare to say something about theirs!

    While I think that people should be able to believe anything you want, I dont think you can say that something out loud without anyone telling you that is the stupidest thing they have ever heard. For example, the idea that we are all the product of severe inbreeding that started when 2 people popped out of thin air sounds completely stupid to me and makes me wonder how people continue through the bible after such brilliant story writing in the first chapter. If someone tried to tell me it as true I would say its a stupid idea and yet that makes me the bad guy.

    What do other people think? Should a belief be respected just because someone else came up with it and told them it was true?

    Personally it wouldn't bother me if an atheist/agnostic did or did not respect my beliefs. I don't know too many of them anyway as in general they tend to be nerdy loner types who have no interest in sport, drink green tea, and are vain in the extreme.


  • Options
    #96
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,738 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    realdanbreen wrote: »
    Personally it wouldn't bother me if an atheist/agnostic did or did not respect my beliefs. I don't know too many of them anyway as in general they tend to be nerdy loner types who have no interest in sport, drink green tea, and are vain in the extreme.

    that's evident by the rest of your post :P

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users Posts: 8,165 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    koth wrote: »
    that's evident by the rest of your post :P

    ?


  • Options
    #98
    Banbh
    Registered Users Posts: 1,037 ✭✭✭Banbh


    .


  • Options
    #99
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,738 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    realdanbreen wrote: »
    ?
    it's a joke based on your post.

    You don't know many atheists, yet you describe them as generally being "they tend to be nerdy loner types who have no interest in sport, drink green tea, and are vain in the extreme."

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #100
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    No, but I was born in a stable because there was no room in the inn.
    realdanbreen wrote: »
    Personally it wouldn't bother me if an atheist/agnostic did or did not respect my beliefs. I don't know too many of them anyway as in general they tend to be nerdy loner types who have no interest in sport, drink green tea, and are vain in the extreme.

    I'm a little bit nerdy, i'm a little bit of a loner, i'm a strange kind of social loner if you get my drift, a loner who likes the company of other loners! I do like green tea, but I also like sports, and i'm not one bit vain ask any one of my army of adoring red hot be-atches.
    Close enough dan, close enough!:D


  • Options
    #101
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users Posts: 8,165 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    I'm a little bit nerdy, i'm a little bit of a loner, i'm a strange kind of social loner if you get my drift, a loner who likes the company of other loners! I do like green tea, but I also like sports, and i'm not one bit vain ask any one of my army of adoring red hot be-atches.
    Close enough dan, close enough!:D


    Yeah pants but theres sports and then theres sports. You probably enjoy lawn tennis & cricket(and maybe certain Rugger clubs) whereas I'd be a hurling and gee gees man.I would for example see the fox as a vermin that needs to be culled whereas you would get queasey at the thoughts of the little furry animal being killed.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Banbh
    Registered Users Posts: 1,037 ✭✭✭Banbh


    Fascinating as Real Dan Breen's stereotyping is, shouldn't he be on a gay-bashing thread? I think he's mixing up his prejudices.


  • Options
    #103
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    WTF?
    realdanbreen wrote: »
    Yeah pants [...]
    Real dan - Welcome to A+A where we have a charter which describes local poster etiquette. Have a read of it before you post again here as your career is likely to be short indeed if you continue in the style with which you've started.

    cheers!


  • Options
    #104
    swampgas
    Registered Users Posts: 3,540 ✭✭✭swampgas


    No, but I was born in a stable because there was no room in the inn.
    smacl wrote: »
    Bit of a jump from there physiological process to physical process. I think the fact that the conscious mind resides in the brain, and the brain exists (for this purpose) as a vast jumble of connected neurons, does not imply that those neurological connections dictate what goes on in the mind.
    Okay, I need to clarify what I mean. When I say "physical" I include all emergent behaviours. I don't see a difference between physical and physiological here, I'm trying to differentiate between "real" (from a materialistic or scientific viewpoint) and "woo" (spiritual / mystic / religious).
    To provide an analogy, a computer can be thought of as a bunch of transistors connected by copper wires which form physical connections. A computer program is essentially a state machine that runs on a computer, and this program has logical connections and sequences that allow it to work. No amount of work examining the physical connections on the computer will help you understand how any given program on that computer works, and will be of little benefit in writing a new program.
    Actually, if you do know the physical state of a computer - the voltages, the currents, etc, you can deduce the logical structure, and you can disassemble the code. It's not easy, but it's not impossible. That's how encryption systems sometimes get broken.
    Similarly, in my opinion, trying to understand the workings of the mind (as opposed to the brain) by examining neurological pathways is going to be of limited value.
    With the mind though, it's all we've got. We don't have a set of design drawings nor do we have any source code, and the brain/mind wasn't designed anyway, it evolved. So, limited value or not, reverse engineering the brain and mind is the only option we have.
    There is nothing supernatural required in understanding that logical connections in the mind don't correspond directly physical connections in the brain, even if they are entirely dependant on those physical connections in order to function, any more than the logic of a computer program corresponds to the layout of circuitry in a computer.
    Agreed. That was the point I was struggling to make.


  • Options
    #105
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users Posts: 8,165 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    Banbh wrote: »
    Fascinating as Real Dan Breen's stereotyping is, shouldn't he be on a gay-bashing thread? I think he's mixing up his prejudices.

    I would be interested to know how you found a connection between my post and gay-bashing ?


  • Options
    #106
    Banbh
    Registered Users Posts: 1,037 ✭✭✭Banbh


    Goodbye troll.


  • Options
    #107
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users Posts: 8,165 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    Banbh wrote: »
    Goodbye troll.


    Thanks for the goodbye's, but you haven't answered my question.
    How are you connecting gay-bashing to any of my posts?


  • Options
    #108
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    No, but I was born in a stable because there was no room in the inn.
    realdanbreen wrote: »
    Yeah pants but theres sports and then theres sports. You probably enjoy lawn tennis & cricket(and maybe certain Rugger clubs) whereas I'd be a hurling and gee gees man.I would for example see the fox as a vermin that needs to be culled whereas you would get queasey at the thoughts of the little furry animal being killed.

    I don't like cricket, but there's not too many physically tougher sports than tennis or rugby my ill-informed friend, not even hurling and certainly not horse racing!
    And leave the foxes alone, what did they ever do to you?


  • Options
    #109
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users Posts: 8,165 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    robindch wrote: »
    Real dan - Welcome to A+A where we have a charter which describes local poster etiquette. Have a read of it before you post again here as your career is likely to be short indeed if you continue in the style with which you've started.

    cheers!

    Forgive me but I didn't realise the topic was confined only to Atheists & Agnostics and contrary opinions would not be welcome.


  • Options
    #110
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,734 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Sarky wrote: »
    You might think I'm being a bit of a romantic, if such a term can be applied to the scientific endeavour. Personally, I think odds are good we'll have gotten a pretty good handle on consciousness within the next 50 years, maybe even creating some within the next 100.

    Nothing wrong with being romantic, doubtless just a cocktail of serotonin and endorphins with one too many espressos ;)

    My feeling is that there is a massive gap between creating a new life form, such as a virus or bacterium, and creating a conscious being. Pure speculation, but I suspect we'll create computer based artificial intelligence long before creating a biological life form capable of sustaining consciousness. If this were to be the case, it is a good indicator that understating how a mind works goes well beyond understanding the mechanism (whether biological or electronic) that hosts it.


  • Options
    #111
    Gordon
    Registered Users Posts: 35,524 ✭✭✭✭Gordon


    realdanbreen wrote: »
    Personally it wouldn't bother me if an atheist/agnostic did or did not respect my beliefs. I don't know too many of them anyway as in general they tend to be nerdy loner types who have no interest in sport, drink green tea, and are vain in the extreme.

    Do you respect their beliefs?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users Posts: 8,165 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    Gordon wrote: »
    Do you respect their beliefs?


    You have hit the nail on the head Gordon! I absolutely do.
    Genuine Respect ,IMO, is the key to having peace & harmony woldwide.
    Exercising respect eliminates all the greed, envy, power grabbing etc that has enveloped the world.


  • Options
    #113
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    WTF?
    realdanbreen wrote: »
    Forgive me but I didn't realise the topic was confined only to Atheists & Agnostics and contrary opinions would not be welcome.
    Here in A+A, you can say pretty much what you like, so long as its done in a smart, friendly, interesting or funny way. Your first post was none of these things, so as above, I suggest you read the forum charter before posting much more.


  • Options
    #114
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,734 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    swampgas wrote: »
    With the mind though, it's all we've got. We don't have a set of design drawings nor do we have any source code, and the brain/mind wasn't designed anyway, it evolved. So, limited value or not, reverse engineering the brain and mind is the only option we have.

    This is why I compare the value of physiology in understanding how the mind works versus other fields of study such as behavioural analysis. To take your example of reverse engineering, if I have a program working on a computer that I want to reverse engineer, it is far easier to study what it does functionally and write another program that does the same thing, than to dump the contents of the memory and disassemble it. We can learn a huge amount dynamically from working models. In this case I believe we can learn as much if not more about the human mind by studying it in action rather than investigating the mass of minutiae that make up structure of the brain.


  • Options
    #115
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    realdanbreen wrote: »
    Yeah pants but theres sports and then theres sports. You probably enjoy lawn tennis & cricket(and maybe certain Rugger clubs) whereas I'd be a hurling and gee gees man.I would for example see the fox as a vermin that needs to be culled whereas you would get queasey at the thoughts of the little furry animal being killed.

    You seem to be naming popular english sports. What do you think of GAA?

    Im interested in martial arts, something that involves an opponent that fights back. You should be careful that the fox doesn't fight back, could do some damage and you'll get queasy from your own blood.

    Cant see you lasting long here anyway.


  • Options
    #116
    realdanbreen
    Registered Users Posts: 8,165 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    You seem to be naming popular english sports. What do you think of GAA?



    Cant see you lasting long here anyway.

    Why?


  • Options
    #117
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,865 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Don't pick this one.
    I would participate in more sport if motorsport wasn't prohibitively expensive when I was 6. :(


  • Options
    #118
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    No.
    Beruthiel wrote: »
    And instantly I thought of Data. :)

    And therein lies the difference between us. :pac:


  • Options
    #119
    Beruthiel
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 42,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Beruthiel


    Oh make no mistake John Connor, I'm a big Terminator fan too.


  • Options
    #120
    Obliq
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,371 ✭✭✭Obliq


    Atari private maternity hospital.
    realdanbreen wrote: »
    Yeah pants but theres sports and then theres sports. You probably enjoy lawn tennis & cricket(and maybe certain Rugger clubs) whereas I'd be a hurling and gee gees man.I would for example see the fox as a vermin that needs to be culled whereas you would get queasey at the thoughts of the little furry animal being killed.

    Shows what you know about atheists - once you've met an atheist, you've met ONE atheist. Mind you, I got into cricket cos my London man has finally managed to explain it to me over the last few years, but hurling is the business and I've converted him to it too. Also not keen on foxes as I have hens (which I kill all by myself with my pretty little atheist hands). So bang goes your theory :D

    Enjoy your stay...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    realdanbreen wrote: »
    Why?

    The mods are really oppressive and will ban anyone just because they have a different opinion to them, at least thats what they claim before they get banned after making insulting comments about everyone with 0 basis.

    So what about GAA? yay or nay?


Advertisement