Re: [FRIAM] faith
There are some things we take so completely on faith that we have great trouble even realizing that we are making an assumption. For example, when I open my eyes, I take it on faith that I am seeing an actual physical universe, and not simply recording impulses that my eyes forwarded to my brain which then refined them, etc. But religious faith is not at all like that. Religious people often have to fight doubts --they often have to attend weekly meetings where they chant or sing or pray or perform rituals to keep their faith --they may hear sermons on the dangers of backsliding, etc. From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [friam-boun...@redfish.com] on behalf of Nicholas Thompson [nickthomp...@earthlink.net] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 12:29 AM To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' Subject: Re: [FRIAM] faith If it is true that, Russ believes that his old and broken down motorcycle can take him from A to B, but he doesn't have faith that it will Can it also be true that Russ doubt whether his ... motorcycle can take him from A to B? Is it the case that, on your understanding, doubt and belief can exist in a person at the same time with respect to the same proposition? Nick -Original Message- From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Sarbajit Roy Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 9:37 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] faith It would take the inverse form Faith is absolute acceptance whereas Belief is limited/conditional acceptance. So Russ may have belief in X without having faith in it. eg. Russ believes that his old and broken down motorcycle can take him from A to B, but he doesn't have faith that it will On 9/24/12, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: Russ, I take your point, but still, I would have a hard time composing a sentence of the form, Russ has faith in X but he doesn't believe in it. Can you compose such a sentence for me? N From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Russ Abbott Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 12:42 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] faith Nick, As I understand your position the words faith and belief are synonyms. I would prefer a definition for faith that distinguishes it from belief. Tory, Thanks for you comment on my posts. I'm glad you enjoy them. My definition of faith makes use of the notion of the everyday world. But I'm not saying that the everyday world is the same for everyone. Your everyday world may be different from mine. I'm just saying that believing that the world will continue to conform to your sense of what the everyday world is like is not faith; it's simple belief. Eric, I would take having faith in something in the colloquial sense as different from faith in a religious context, which is what I was focusing on. -- Russ On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 9:27 PM, Victoria Hughes victo...@toryhughes.com wrote: Russ wrote, in part- Faith, I would say (in fact I did earlier) is believing something that one wouldn't otherwise believe without faith. Believing that the everyday world is the everyday world doesn't seem to me to require faith. Russ, with all due respect for the enjoyment I get from your posts, I find this suspiciously tautological. Who are you to define for the rest of humanity (and other sentient life forms) what 'the everyday world' incorporates? Numerous 'for instance' cases can immediately be made here. All you can do is define what you believe for yourself. You cannot extrapolate what is defensible for others to believe, from your own beliefs. And this statement ' Faith is believing something that one wouldn't believe without faith'. Hm and hm again. Eagleman's new book Incognito http://www.amazon.com/Incognito-Secret-Lives-David-Eagleman/dp/030738 9928/r ef=sr_1_1?s=booksie=UTF8qid=1348460523sr=1-1keywords=incognito+by+ david+ eagleman offers fruitful information from recent neuroscience that eagleman may interest others on this list. His ultimate sections bring up hard questions about legal and ethical issues in the face of the myriad 'zombie programs' that run most of our behaviour. This looks like - but is not as simplistic as - 'yet another pop science book.' A review David Eagleman's http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/brainiac/2011/06/david_eaglem ans.ht ml Incognito - Brainiac Tory FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at
Re: [FRIAM] faith
In his biography - Sonny Barger is quoted as saying he wished the Angels had not been so closely tied to Harley - that the Japanese cruisers in particular were more reliable and much faster. He said that before the rebirth of Harley - post AMF. My Crossbones has the same reliability and overall quality as the competitors but is not as fast. But I cruise for hours at 90 (Mph no Kph) and even my goldwing could not do that as comfortably or as well. davew On Tue, Sep 25, 2012, at 10:11 AM, Steve Smith wrote: Roger - And I think that is why Doug chooses a sleek German-Engineered machine over one of those big-iron sculptures you used to see on the side of the road being fiddled with... (now that they cost more than a Prius and only Doctors and Lawyers own them, that has changed a little). I have mostly been a Honda man with a few Yamahas and Suzuki's thrown in for spice I came within an inch of buying a Ducati Elefant once, but I've never had any of my old, worn out Jap bikes fail me! Of course, it is harder to ignore warning signs of problems on a motorcycle... if you hear a noise or feel a shimmy, you just look down, it is all right there threatening to come apart in your lap... fluid leaks end up ON you... etc. And that paranoia Dave and Doug profess, it goes double for I wonder if I should repack that wheel bearing?. But your point is well taken. In this discussion of faith (still in the subject line!), I'm amazed at how much the most faithless take on blind faith about such things. I marvel at the strength of materials and quality of design and workmanship on the simplest things *all the time* and I know I'm missing most of it. That 5000 lb Camp Trailer hung off the back of your truck by a 2 ball (with a 1 neck)? Amazing! Truly Amazing! And we haven't even talked about light planes (recently) yet! - Steve On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Steve Smith [1]sasm...@swcp.com wrote: My father bought a wartime surplus Harley when he returned from WWII, had a grand good time stripping the military paintjob and repainting it only to have two scary accidents within a few months (civilian turning left in front of him, mechanical failure in the drive sprocket) which put him off the whole business. I was going to bring up our faith in machines to continue to work as intended, despite our contrary experience. There's nothing quite like a 2 wheeler that becomes a 1-1/2 or 1 wheeler at any velocity worth mentioning. -- rec -- FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at [2]http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at [3]http://www.friam.org References 1. mailto:sasm...@swcp.com 2. http://www.friam.org/ 3. http://www.friam.org/ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith - take 2
The faith discussion seemed to fall apart, but might now be pulling itself back together - hence the slight subject change. One variant of the pragmatic dictum, using James's catchy phrasing, is that There is no difference that doesn't make a difference. In this particular situation, the there is no I have faith that which doesn't have imply doing y will have z consequence. Now, it is certainly might be possible that the consequence of your faith do not include a particular type of outcome that someone else thinks should be logically consequent; i.e., it is possible your faith that P is true is separate from your faith that a particular event E will happen. However, it is not possible that your faith that P is true is completely disconnected from your faith that certain events will occur under certain circumstances. Perhaps the circumstances are unlikely to occur, perhaps the relevant circumstances are so far in the future or past as to be barely worth discussing in the present (outside of conversations like this), but ultimately There is no difference that doesn't make a difference. People with Faith in P must be different in some set of circumstances from people without Faith in P, or there is no difference between having and not-having such faith. By the way, one interesting move someone could make in this conversation would be to claim that the crucial difference is that they claim to have Faith in P when asked. (This is, for example, how a subset of Christian's understand their forgiveness clause.) If that were accepted as true, then we would have to accept that there was no difference between having Faith in P and claiming-to-have Faith in P - you know, because if there is no difference then there is no difference. Thus, though that move might be tempting, the consequence is probably unpalatable to most. . Eric On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 01:20 AM, Russ Abbott russ.abb...@gmail.com wrote: I've never spent much time studying modal logic. The http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxastic_logic version of faith that I pointed to in the Stanford Encyc of Phil article is a model logic version. Your example sentences are overflowing with modal modifiers. Personally I don't see why I wouldn't agree to the sentences in your example. But as I've said before, we seem to be mixing a number of different senses of faith. To have faith that P (is true) is different from to have faith that event E will happen. -- Russ Abbott _ Professor, Computer Science California State University, Los Angeles My paper on how the Fed can fix the economy: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1977688 Google voice: 747-999-5105 Google+: https://plus.google.com/114865618166480775623/ vita: http://sites.google.com/site/russabbott/ http://cs.calstatela.edu/wiki/ and the courses I teach _ On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 9:29 PM, Nicholas Thompson # wrote: If it is true that, Russ believes that his old and broken down motorcycle can take him from A to B, but he doesn't have faith that it will Can it also be true that Russ doubt whether his ... motorcycle can take him from A to B? Is it the case that, on your understanding, doubt and belief can exist in a person at the same time with respect to the same proposition? Nick -Original Message- From: # [mailto:#] On Behalf Of Sarbajit Roy Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 9:37 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] faith It would take the inverse form Faith is absolute acceptance whereas Belief is limited/conditional acceptance. So Russ may have belief in X without having faith in it. eg. Russ believes that his old and broken down motorcycle can take him from A to B, but he doesn't have faith that it will On 9/24/12, Nicholas Thompson # wrote: Russ, I take your point, but still, I would have a hard time composing a sentence of the form, Russ has faith in X but he doesn't believe in it. Can you compose such a sentence for me? N From: # [mailto:#] On Behalf Of Russ Abbott Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 12:42 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] faith Nick, As I understand your position the words faith and belief are synonyms. I would prefer a definition for faith that distinguishes it from belief. Tory, Thanks for you comment on my posts. I'm glad you enjoy them. My definition of faith makes use of the notion of the everyday world. But I'm not saying that the everyday world is the same for everyone. Your everyday world may be different from mine. I'm just saying that believing that the world will continue to conform to your sense of what the everyday world is like is not faith; it's simple belief. Eric, I would take having faith in something in the colloquial sense as different
Re: [FRIAM] Faith
If people are really interested in the evolution of Buddhism - Jenny Quillien and I are planning a Buddha Tour - a month long study trip starting at Bodh Gaya (birthplace) then proceeding to Dharmsala (Tibetan variation) - Bangkok (Hinayana variation) - shaolin (the Taoist infusion) - Nara Japan (Zen) - then San Francisco (Watts and Suzuki). The focus of the study will be on epistemology and metaphysics with a small amount of critical examination of the Tao of Physics Quantum Consciousness claim that Buddhism and Taoism anticipated quantum physics. Let me know - off-list - if you are interested in being kept current with out plans. (It will be pricey because of all the travel, but it should be a good month.) Asian Philosophy was my undergraduate major and I have been studying it since 1968. davew (profw...@fastmail.fm) On Tue, Sep 25, 2012, at 07:16 PM, Sarbajit Roy wrote: Dear Russ 1. Religion / faith is not something which can be bought, although the US Televangelists who buy cheap advertising on my cable TV channels to sell me JSUSSS at 4:00 a.m may disagree. 2. Buddhism is a religion indigenous to the Indian sub-continent (per wikipedia). 3. BUDDHUISM is a religion exogenous to the Indian sub-continent. (per Sarbajit) (FYI - The word buddhu means fool, idiot or moron ) 4. Western Buddhists are buddhus who by doing deep scholarly research on fragments of bark containing the secrets of the Wise (Amida ) Buddha allegedly written 600 years after his death in 500 BCE (or was it 400 BCE ?) think they know everything. These are the same Buddhus who after looking at a dinosaur's bones conclude that dinosaurs had a brain in their butt. 5. A Religion / Faith has to be experienced in its setting. Shifting the setting causes it to lose its essence in translation. In computer terms, the software is non-portable. 6. Whatever you chose to call it, there is no such thing as modern Buddhism. Western (presumably United States of America Western) Buddhuism is the concoction of tripped out frauds (who experienced India/Nepal) and ranks on the same ersatz plane as American Chopsuey and Chicken Tikka Masala. . PS: Does (your ?) Western Buddhism model include rebirth ? Sarbajit On 9/23/12, Russ Abbott russ.abb...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not really buying that. My sense of modern (and especially western) Buddhism seems pretty God-free. *-- Russ Abbott* *_* *** Professor, Computer Science* * California State University, Los Angeles* * My paper on how the Fed can fix the economy: ssrn.com/abstract=1977688* * Google voice: 747-*999-5105 Google+: plus.google.com/114865618166480775623/ * vita: *sites.google.com/site/russabbott/ CS Wiki http://cs.calstatela.edu/wiki/ and the courses I teach *_* On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Sarbajit Roy sroy...@gmail.com wrote: Buddhism may not have a God but Buddhism belief has gods who are superior beings existing at various planes of existence. Their gods, called Devas, apparently exist at the highest plane of existence well above humans, and animals, and various beings condemned in past lives to inhabit hell (the lowest planes). Buddhism's demons called Asuras occupy another zone. However, in Zorastrianism, conversely the gods are called Ahuras and the demons are called Daevas (root terms of devil): So it seems possible that all these zones / planes are actually political statements referring to events in some hoary past at an indeterminate location. http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/aryans/religion.htm http://www.gutenberg.org/files/20583/20583-h/20583-h.htm (page 287) Re: Buddhism as a religion: BTW: Are we referring to God as creator- God ? On 9/23/12, Russ Abbott russ.abb...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, Sarbajit. As I understand it Buddhism does not have a God. Does that mean you would not classify it as a religion? -- Russ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith - take 2
Everybody, Have a look at the link, doxastic logic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxastic_logic , that Russ put in his note below. It’s a stunner. Nick From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of ERIC P. CHARLES Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 8:39 AM To: Russ Abbott Cc: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] faith - take 2 The faith discussion seemed to fall apart, but might now be pulling itself back together - hence the slight subject change. One variant of the pragmatic dictum, using James's catchy phrasing, is that There is no difference that doesn't make a difference. In this particular situation, the there is no I have faith that which doesn't have imply doing y will have z consequence. Now, it is certainly might be possible that the consequence of your faith do not include a particular type of outcome that someone else thinks should be logically consequent; i.e., it is possible your faith that P is true is separate from your faith that a particular event E will happen. However, it is not possible that your faith that P is true is completely disconnected from your faith that certain events will occur under certain circumstances. Perhaps the circumstances are unlikely to occur, perhaps the relevant circumstances are so far in the future or past as to be barely worth discussing in the present (outside of conversations like this), but ultimately There is no difference that doesn't make a difference. People with Faith in P must be different in some set of circumstances from people without Faith in P, or there is no difference between having and not-having such faith. By the way, one interesting move someone could make in this conversation would be to claim that the crucial difference is that they claim to have Faith in P when asked. (This is, for example, how a subset of Christian's understand their forgiveness clause.) If that were accepted as true, then we would have to accept that there was no difference between having Faith in P and claiming-to-have Faith in P - you know, because if there is no difference then there is no difference. Thus, though that move might be tempting, the consequence is probably unpalatable to most. . Eric On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 01:20 AM, Russ Abbott russ.abb...@gmail.com wrote: I've never spent much time studying modal logic. The doxastic logic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxastic_logic version of faith that I pointed to in the Stanford Encyc of Phil article is a model logic version. Your example sentences are overflowing with modal modifiers. Personally I don't see why I wouldn't agree to the sentences in your example. But as I've said before, we seem to be mixing a number of different senses of faith. To have faith that P (is true) is different from to have faith that event E will happen. -- Russ Abbott _ Professor, Computer Science California State University, Los Angeles My paper on how the Fed can fix the economy: ssrn.com/abstract=1977688 Google voice: 747-999-5105 Google+: plus.google.com/114865618166480775623/ vita: http://sites.google.com/site/russabbott/ sites.google.com/site/russabbott/ CS Wiki http://cs.calstatela.edu/wiki/ and the courses I teach _ On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 9:29 PM, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: If it is true that, Russ believes that his old and broken down motorcycle can take him from A to B, but he doesn't have faith that it will Can it also be true that Russ doubt whether his ... motorcycle can take him from A to B? Is it the case that, on your understanding, doubt and belief can exist in a person at the same time with respect to the same proposition? Nick -Original Message- From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Sarbajit Roy Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 9:37 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] faith It would take the inverse form Faith is absolute acceptance whereas Belief is limited/conditional acceptance. So Russ may have belief in X without having faith in it. eg. Russ believes that his old and broken down motorcycle can take him from A to B, but he doesn't have faith that it will On 9/24/12, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: Russ, I take your point, but still, I would have a hard time composing a sentence of the form, Russ has faith in X but he doesn't believe in it. Can you compose such a sentence for me? N From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Russ Abbott Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 12:42 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] faith Nick, As I understand your position the words faith and belief are synonyms. I would prefer a
Re: [FRIAM] faith
In the context of religious faith. doubt * belief = 1 If doubt = 0 then belief = 1/0 = singularity = God If certainty = 0 then doubt = 1/0 = noGod In most Eastern religions people are somewhere in between and see no harm in (occasionally) worshiping things they don't always believe in (sort of like insurance). So yes, belief and doubt are normally present in varying degrees for the same proposition in the vast majority of believers / doubters. Sarbajit On 9/26/12, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: If it is true that, Russ believes that his old and broken down motorcycle can take him from A to B, but he doesn't have faith that it will Can it also be true that Russ doubt whether his ... motorcycle can take him from A to B? Is it the case that, on your understanding, doubt and belief can exist in a person at the same time with respect to the same proposition? Nick -Original Message- From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Sarbajit Roy Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 9:37 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] faith It would take the inverse form Faith is absolute acceptance whereas Belief is limited/conditional acceptance. So Russ may have belief in X without having faith in it. eg. Russ believes that his old and broken down motorcycle can take him from A to B, but he doesn't have faith that it will FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith
Sarbajit, Interesting. I am packing up and also somebody has suggested that I am jamming the channel here, so I wont say more now, except to thank you for your illuminating and throughtful posts. Nick -Original Message- From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Sarbajit Roy Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 11:38 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] faith In the context of religious faith. doubt * belief = 1 If doubt = 0 then belief = 1/0 = singularity = God If certainty = 0 then doubt = 1/0 = noGod In most Eastern religions people are somewhere in between and see no harm in (occasionally) worshiping things they don't always believe in (sort of like insurance). So yes, belief and doubt are normally present in varying degrees for the same proposition in the vast majority of believers / doubters. Sarbajit On 9/26/12, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: If it is true that, Russ believes that his old and broken down motorcycle can take him from A to B, but he doesn't have faith that it will Can it also be true that Russ doubt whether his ... motorcycle can take him from A to B? Is it the case that, on your understanding, doubt and belief can exist in a person at the same time with respect to the same proposition? Nick -Original Message- From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Sarbajit Roy Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 9:37 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] faith It would take the inverse form Faith is absolute acceptance whereas Belief is limited/conditional acceptance. So Russ may have belief in X without having faith in it. eg. Russ believes that his old and broken down motorcycle can take him from A to B, but he doesn't have faith that it will FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] DEBATE about Religion and Atheism
Alfredo -- Very interesting listening. One might believe that they are all very reasonable men, until you get to the very end of the video where they listen to Hitch argue that the end of world civilization is imminent unless the Islamic world is reformed of its unacceptable beliefs, a reformation which he sees as only being effectively pursued by American military force. His colleagues are either struck speechless or they are in agreement. The truly unacceptable belief of Islam, as far as I can tell, is Jihad, the doctrine that beliefs which endanger the faithful may need to be answered with force. Sam Harris posted http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/on-the-freedom-to-offend-an-imaginary-god last week. -- rec -- 2012/9/22 Alfredo Covaleda alfredocoval...@gmail.com Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUg-1NCCowc PS. Christopher Hitchens murió en diciembre el año pasado. Asi que o está en la Gloria de Dios o simplemente transformado en otras formas físicas de la naturaleza. A mi me da igual ! -- _ * * *Alfredo Covaleda Vélez* Ingeniero Agrónomo Universidad Nacional Tecnólogo en Informática Uniminuto Cel: (+57) 311 213 7829 __ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith
http://www.nature.com has provoked its own discussion on faith. In August: *Sometimes science must give way to religion* http://www.nature.com/news/sometimes-science-must-give-way-to-religion-1.11244 arguing why it will always be necessary to have ways of understanding our world beyond the scientifically rational and setting off a long chain of online comments. The author, an atheist, compared the Hindu cosmologies portrayed on friezes at Angkor Wat and the explanation of the Higg's Boson given in the New York Times. This week: three short published responses: *Rationality: Evidence must prevail* http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v489/n7417/full/489502d.html [...] the rational thought that underpins science provides us with a system that works. *Rationality: Science is not bad faith* http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v489/n7417/full/489502e.html Viewing temples and falling in love can be moving experiences, but they don't reveal a hidden reality whose articulation eludes science. *Rationality: Religion defies understanding* http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v489/n7417/full/489502f.html Our species has derived many things from its various religions — some fair and noble, others foul and destructive — but understanding is not one of them. -- rec -- FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
[FRIAM] Buddha Tour.
Dave and Jenny - In the spirit of living vicariously, I took a moment to map a presumed route (by Nissan Patrol, Jeepney, Motorcycle and/or foot)... with the help of course, of Google (long name for an all-knowing God?) Acquiring a Seep like this modified one http://www.4wdonline.com/Mil/HalfSafe.html, might save some $$ on ocean transport. Over 37K kilometers (37Megalometers?) and a suggested 633 hours of riding... which I think would include sitting on the bike while on the ship from Japan to Hawaii to Seattle... not required I don't think, though sitting is an important part of Buddhist practice isn't it? At the risk of experiencing the locations out of chronological order, this could be cut by about 6M and 70 hours? Google is not quite all-knowing enough yet to give us public transportation directions... but prescribed walking route is similar to the driving one... slowing you down from 50kph to more like 5kph and 6100 hours. Walking meditation is a higher form than sitting isn't it? 254 days nominally... if you choose to walk it, maybe Google will equip you with a ladybug and underwrite your expenses in return for a complete Streetview sequence of the whole route. Or bring Microsoft into the discussion and start a bidding war? Ironically Google Warns: /*Walking directions are in beta.*/ /Use caution -- This route may be missing sidewalks or pedestrian paths./ Google is like the Roman or Norse God of navigation, inheriting many characteristics from the Greek version known as AAA, presumably upgraded with modern features but lacking some of the old school charm? If you meet the Buddha (or Marco Polo) en route it is conventional to kill him... good luck or karma or something. But I think you already knew this. I'm guessing you will be flying commercial... using local transport... etc. It sounds like a great trip... Is Sarbajit's location on your agenda? Any other FRIAMers vaguely on your path? Happy Travels... the rest of us will settle for rereading our tattered copies of Siddhartha or z+Motorcyle Mtc. or Watt's The Book or for the more mathematically inclined, Paul Erdos imaginary book by the same name. /Paul Erdos http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Erd%C5%91s//, who often referred to The Book in which //God http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God//keeps the most elegant proof of each mathematical //theorem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theorem//. During a lecture in 1985, Erdos said, You don't have to believe in God, but you should believe in The Book./ I am a doubter (is that the opposite of a faither?), and doubt that anyone can recognize, much less define the most elegant proof. I think this is an undecideable problem. Decidedly Yours, - Steve If people are really interested in the evolution of Buddhism - Jenny Quillien and I are planning a Buddha Tour - a month long study trip starting at Bodh Gaya (birthplace) then proceeding to Dharmsala (Tibetan variation) - Bangkok (Hinayana variation) - shaolin (the Taoist infusion) - Nara Japan (Zen) - then San Francisco (Watts and Suzuki). The focus of the study will be on epistemology and metaphysics with a small amount of critical examination of the Tao of Physics Quantum Consciousness claim that Buddhism and Taoism anticipated quantum physics. Let me know - off-list - if you are interested in being kept current with out plans. (It will be pricey because of all the travel, but it should be a good month.) Asian Philosophy was my undergraduate major and I have been studying it since 1968. davew (profw...@fastmail.fm) On Tue, Sep 25, 2012, at 07:16 PM, Sarbajit Roy wrote: Dear Russ 1. Religion / faith is not something which can be bought, although the US Televangelists who buy cheap advertising on my cable TV channels to sell me JSUSSS at 4:00 a.m may disagree. 2. Buddhism is a religion indigenous to the Indian sub-continent (per wikipedia). 3. BUDDHUISM is a religion exogenous to the Indian sub-continent. (per Sarbajit) (FYI - The word buddhu means fool, idiot or moron ) 4. Western Buddhists are buddhus who by doing deep scholarly research on fragments of bark containing the secrets of the Wise (Amida ) Buddha allegedly written 600 years after his death in 500 BCE (or was it 400 BCE ?) think they know everything. These are the same Buddhus who after looking at a dinosaur's bones conclude that dinosaurs had a brain in their butt. 5. A Religion / Faith has to be experienced in its setting. Shifting the setting causes it to lose its essence in translation. In computer terms, the software is non-portable. 6. Whatever you chose to call it, there is no such thing as modern Buddhism. Western (presumably United States of America Western) Buddhuism is the concoction of tripped out frauds (who experienced India/Nepal) and ranks on the same ersatz plane as American Chopsuey and Chicken Tikka Masala. . PS: Does (your ?) Western Buddhism model include
Re: [FRIAM] faith
Gentlemen and Ladies- There is a big question in this endless and reiterative loop about faith and science that no one mentions. So I will. Seems to be one of my functions. To wit: Even our brains have two primary and differing sections, the hemispheres: for best health and growth of the individual both must be functioning and working together. Why is the idea of two differing but synergistic approaches so challenging to so many on this list? Or are you arguing for the fun of the game? For an example of how unworkable the idea of a single approach sounds, maybe I can ask you some questions: Most of you are straight men, yes? Many of you have been married. Would you agree that in your partnership only you have ever had valid or useful information? IE for any situation you've been in, to which your female partners have contributed physical / mental / emotional / spiritual information, yours was the only information needed or useful? Do you think that your life, your pursuits, your existence only needs you and other men? IE If there were no women anywhere, things would universally work better? I could continue but you hopefully already can see my point. This planet is dualistic. I will explain that later if that's not. But the whole set-up is dualistic. Our opportunity and challenge- particularly visible now- is to understand and resolve dualities as necessary for the whole, to accept each in turn, to mitigate harm as we do so. Faith and religion are never going to yield to logic. They live in a different part of your mind, that has other things to contribute, and that doesn't have direct access to linear language. Art and music yes, as languages; words and analyses no. This is in no way an anti-science statement! This is a plea for a world-view that realizes Both are needed. BOTH / AND not either /or. Tory http://www.nature.com has provoked its own discussion on faith. In August: Sometimes science must give way to religion http://www.nature.com/news/sometimes-science-must-give-way-to-religion-1.11244 arguing why it will always be necessary to have ways of understanding our world beyond the scientifically rational and setting off a long chain of online comments. The author, an atheist, compared the Hindu cosmologies portrayed on friezes at Angkor Wat and the explanation of the Higg's Boson given in the New York Times. This week: three short published responses: Rationality: Evidence must prevail http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v489/n7417/full/489502d.html [...] the rational thought that underpins science provides us with a system that works. Rationality: Science is not bad faith http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v489/n7417/full/489502e.html Viewing temples and falling in love can be moving experiences, but they don't reveal a hidden reality whose articulation eludes science. Rationality: Religion defies understanding http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v489/n7417/full/489502f.html Our species has derived many things from its various religions — some fair and noble, others foul and destructive — but understanding is not one of them. -- rec -- FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith - take 2
On 9/26/12 9:09 AM, Nicholas Thompson wrote: Everybody, Have a look at the link, doxastic logic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxastic_logic, that Russ put in his note below. It's a stunner. Nick The preferred variant of many (vocal) FRIAMers is /Dogmatic Logic/ which is the preferred logic of /Conceited /and /Peculiar/ reasoners (as defined by /Doxastic/ logic), though /Bombastic/ reasoning always prevails! When I first read Smullyan's Forever Undecided, I realized that I was a /Timid/ reasoner regarding religious issues, but in all else I was either a /Knee-jerk/ (similar to /Reflexive/, but more violent) reasoner or a /Perniciously Precocious/ reasoner (similar to /Peculiar/ reasoner, only more destructive). I just can't leave stuff alone, can I? FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith
No, I think that would be me (jamming the channel)... Sarbajit, Interesting. I am packing up and also somebody has suggested that I am jamming the channel here, so I wont say more now, except to thank you for your illuminating and throughtful posts. Nick -Original Message- From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Sarbajit Roy Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 11:38 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] faith In the context of religious faith. doubt * belief = 1 If doubt = 0 then belief = 1/0 = singularity = God If certainty = 0 then doubt = 1/0 = noGod In most Eastern religions people are somewhere in between and see no harm in (occasionally) worshiping things they don't always believe in (sort of like insurance). So yes, belief and doubt are normally present in varying degrees for the same proposition in the vast majority of believers / doubters. Sarbajit On 9/26/12, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: If it is true that, Russ believes that his old and broken down motorcycle can take him from A to B, but he doesn't have faith that it will Can it also be true that Russ doubt whether his ... motorcycle can take him from A to B? Is it the case that, on your understanding, doubt and belief can exist in a person at the same time with respect to the same proposition? Nick -Original Message- From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Sarbajit Roy Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 9:37 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] faith It would take the inverse form Faith is absolute acceptance whereas Belief is limited/conditional acceptance. So Russ may have belief in X without having faith in it. eg. Russ believes that his old and broken down motorcycle can take him from A to B, but he doesn't have faith that it will FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] DEBATE about Religion and Atheism
Did you just point out that the mighty Hitch himself has come up with his own justification for an anti-Islamic Jihad? And the rest endorsed it with their silence? Alfredo -- Very interesting listening. One might believe that they are all very reasonable men, until you get to the very end of the video where they listen to Hitch argue that the end of world civilization is imminent unless the Islamic world is reformed of its unacceptable beliefs, a reformation which he sees as only being effectively pursued by American military force. His colleagues are either struck speechless or they are in agreement. The truly unacceptable belief of Islam, as far as I can tell, is Jihad, the doctrine that beliefs which endanger the faithful may need to be answered with force. Sam Harris posted http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/on-the-freedom-to-offend-an-imaginary-god last week. -- rec -- 2012/9/22 Alfredo Covaleda alfredocoval...@gmail.com mailto:alfredocoval...@gmail.com Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUg-1NCCowc PS. Christopher Hitchens murió en diciembre el año pasado. Asi que o está en la Gloria de Dios o simplemente transformado en otras formas físicas de la naturaleza. A mi me da igual ! -- _ * * *Alfredo Covaleda Vélez* Ingeniero Agrónomo Universidad Nacional Tecnólogo en Informática Uniminuto Cel: (+57) 311 213 7829 tel:%28%2B57%29%20311%20213%207829 __ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] Buddha Tour.
Oh Yeah... https://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=Bangkok+Thailanddaddr=Bodh+Gaya,+Bihar,+India+to:Dharmsala,+Himachal+Pradesh,+%E1%BA%A4n+%C4%90%E1%BB%99+to:Shaolin+Temple,+Shaolin+Temple,+%E6%B2%B3%E5%8D%97%E7%9C%81%E7%99%BB%E5%B0%81%E5%B8%82%E5%B5%A9%E5%B1%B1%E5%B0%91%E6%9E%97%E6%99%AF%E5%8C%BA,+China+to:Nara,+Nara+Prefecture,+Japan+to:San+Francisco,+CAhl=enie=UTF8ll=33.431441,152.226563spn=108.483262,243.632812sll=34.885931,151.875sspn=107.544641,243.632812geocode=FZ7X0QAdQWr9BSnzYQ0oMmAdMTEgSOJdsgABAQ%3BFT7ReAEdK90QBSk97RK8XyzzOTFu2VfM3MW7CQ%3BFRaW6wEdhJmMBCm5KlMzH1EbOTGVDgpeReH1xA%3BFTGHDgId9Fu7BiHRfLZSxZFv3Smt_LCJWMjXNTHRfLZSxZFv3Q%3BFZ9AEQIdSDgYCCnBDKd4xTcBYDEiJkm5sNn-Sg%3BFVJmQAIdKAe0-CkhAGkAbZqFgDH_rXbwZxNQSgdirflg=wmra=lst=mz=2 FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith
Tory - Why is the idea of two differing but synergistic approaches so challenging to so many on this list? Or are you arguing for the fun of the game? I'm pretty sure both the Monkey and the Weasel are in it for the endorphins released. The Mulberry bush is an innocent bystander, if in fact the center of the play. The Tigers are merely victims of their own Vanity and the cleverness of our friend Sambo. Sambo, perhaps has more significant motives. I know I don't. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith
(A post script to my frustrated rant replying to this thread (not to this post, Roger)) None of what I said precludes the table pounding and the whiskey. Need to go on record about that. Tory On Sep 26, 2012, at 2:02 PM, Roger Critchlow wrote: http://www.nature.com has provoked its own discussion on faith. In August: Sometimes science must give way to religion http://www.nature.com/news/sometimes-science-must-give-way-to-religion-1.11244 arguing why it will always be necessary to have ways of understanding our world beyond the scientifically rational and setting off a long chain of online comments. The author, an atheist, compared the Hindu cosmologies portrayed on friezes at Angkor Wat and the explanation of the Higg's Boson given in the New York Times. This week: three short published responses: Rationality: Evidence must prevail http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v489/n7417/full/489502d.html [...] the rational thought that underpins science provides us with a system that works. Rationality: Science is not bad faith http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v489/n7417/full/489502e.html Viewing temples and falling in love can be moving experiences, but they don't reveal a hidden reality whose articulation eludes science. Rationality: Religion defies understanding http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v489/n7417/full/489502f.html Our species has derived many things from its various religions — some fair and noble, others foul and destructive — but understanding is not one of them. -- rec -- FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith
It's your honesty I've always loved about you, Steve. I'm going with the weasel. T On Sep 26, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Steve Smith wrote: Tory - Why is the idea of two differing but synergistic approaches so challenging to so many on this list? Or are you arguing for the fun of the game? I'm pretty sure both the Monkey and the Weasel are in it for the endorphins released. The Mulberry bush is an innocent bystander, if in fact the center of the play. The Tigers are merely victims of their own Vanity and the cleverness of our friend Sambo. Sambo, perhaps has more significant motives. I know I don't. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith
Driving home I heard a report about New Zealand gangs. Apparently there are more gang-members *per capita* in New Zealand than any other country. (Surprised me.) Some of them are terribly violent. Very scary. Some have been reformed after finding Jesus. One of the best things that religion has ever done! *-- Russ Abbott* *_* *** Professor, Computer Science* * California State University, Los Angeles* * My paper on how the Fed can fix the economy: ssrn.com/abstract=1977688* * Google voice: 747-*999-5105 Google+: plus.google.com/114865618166480775623/ * vita: *sites.google.com/site/russabbott/ CS Wiki http://cs.calstatela.edu/wiki/ and the courses I teach *_* On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Victoria Hughes victo...@toryhughes.comwrote: It's your honesty I've always loved about you, Steve. I'm going with the weasel. T On Sep 26, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Steve Smith wrote: Tory - Why is the idea of two differing but synergistic approaches so challenging to so many on this list? Or are you arguing for the fun of the game? I'm pretty sure both the Monkey and the Weasel are in it for the endorphins released. The Mulberry bush is an innocent bystander, if in fact the center of the play. The Tigers are merely victims of their own Vanity and the cleverness of our friend Sambo. Sambo, perhaps has more significant motives. I know I don't. ==**== FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org ==**== FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith
Not necessarily, the religious conversion will likely reduce the kill-off rate. On the other hand, I suppose, we could encourage Islamic and Christian themed gangs and still achieve a reasonable kill-off goal. On Sep 26, 2012 4:19 PM, Russ Abbott russ.abb...@gmail.com wrote: Driving home I heard a report about New Zealand gangs. Apparently there are more gang-members *per capita* in New Zealand than any other country. (Surprised me.) Some of them are terribly violent. Very scary. Some have been reformed after finding Jesus. One of the best things that religion has ever done! *-- Russ Abbott* *_* *** Professor, Computer Science* * California State University, Los Angeles* * My paper on how the Fed can fix the economy: ssrn.com/abstract=1977688* * Google voice: 747-*999-5105 Google+: plus.google.com/114865618166480775623/ * vita: *sites.google.com/site/russabbott/ CS Wiki http://cs.calstatela.edu/wiki/ and the courses I teach *_* On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Victoria Hughes victo...@toryhughes.comwrote: It's your honesty I've always loved about you, Steve. I'm going with the weasel. T On Sep 26, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Steve Smith wrote: Tory - Why is the idea of two differing but synergistic approaches so challenging to so many on this list? Or are you arguing for the fun of the game? I'm pretty sure both the Monkey and the Weasel are in it for the endorphins released. The Mulberry bush is an innocent bystander, if in fact the center of the play. The Tigers are merely victims of their own Vanity and the cleverness of our friend Sambo. Sambo, perhaps has more significant motives. I know I don't. ==**== FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org ==**== FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Steve Smith sasm...@swcp.com wrote: Tory - Why is the idea of two differing but synergistic approaches so challenging to so many on this list? Or are you arguing for the fun of the game? I'm pretty sure both the Monkey and the Weasel are in it for the endorphins released. I don't think I'm talking about two differing approaches. Some beliefs are so common that no one even thinks about them. Many people deny that they're beliefs at all. Other beliefs extend and explain and modify the common ones in different ways. But I say we're all believers on this bus, some are just more conscious of it. -- rec -- FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] DEBATE about Religion and Atheism
Yes, that's one way to hear it. But on review, I now hear Dennett attempting to interject, and Hitch allowing that Dawkins disagrees. Also wondering what got edited out, since something did. But start at 1:54:00 and listen to the last three minutes and fourteen seconds, and give me your interpretation. Jump back another 4 minutes for riffs on Messianic Judaism, wicked Quakers, and fascist Roman Catholics. -- rec -- On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Steve Smith sasm...@swcp.com wrote: Did you just point out that the mighty Hitch himself has come up with his own justification for an anti-Islamic Jihad? And the rest endorsed it with their silence? Alfredo -- Very interesting listening. One might believe that they are all very reasonable men, until you get to the very end of the video where they listen to Hitch argue that the end of world civilization is imminent unless the Islamic world is reformed of its unacceptable beliefs, a reformation which he sees as only being effectively pursued by American military force. His colleagues are either struck speechless or they are in agreement. The truly unacceptable belief of Islam, as far as I can tell, is Jihad, the doctrine that beliefs which endanger the faithful may need to be answered with force. Sam Harris posted http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/on-the-freedom-to-offend-an-imaginary-god last week. -- rec -- 2012/9/22 Alfredo Covaleda alfredocoval...@gmail.com Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUg-1NCCowc PS. Christopher Hitchens murió en diciembre el año pasado. Asi que o está en la Gloria de Dios o simplemente transformado en otras formas físicas de la naturaleza. A mi me da igual ! -- _ * * *Alfredo Covaleda Vélez* Ingeniero Agrónomo Universidad Nacional Tecnólogo en Informática Uniminuto Cel: (+57) 311 213 7829 %28%2B57%29%20311%20213%207829 __ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith
Well, speaking from my own (apparent) semi-unique perspective: Darwin's proposition of Survival of the Fittest would seem to scream out for the elimination of degenerate components of society which threaten to bring the entire species to total extinction. And, being an engineer, I cannot but cheer and encourage any activity that speeds the destruction of those destructive elements of society. Like gang conflicts, for example. And religion, for another. Not that there is much difference, really. --Doug On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Roger Critchlow r...@elf.org wrote: On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Steve Smith sasm...@swcp.com wrote: Tory - Why is the idea of two differing but synergistic approaches so challenging to so many on this list? Or are you arguing for the fun of the game? I'm pretty sure both the Monkey and the Weasel are in it for the endorphins released. I don't think I'm talking about two differing approaches. Some beliefs are so common that no one even thinks about them. Many people deny that they're beliefs at all. Other beliefs extend and explain and modify the common ones in different ways. But I say we're all believers on this bus, some are just more conscious of it. -- rec -- FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org -- Doug Roberts drobe...@rti.org d...@parrot-farm.net http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins 505-455-7333 - Office 505-670-8195 - Cell FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith
Darwinism only says that the least prolific will be eliminated. It says nothing about degeneracy, unless, of course profligacy is defined as advanced. Spencer was the social Darwinist, not Darwin. In fact, it was SPENCER, who coined the survival of the fittest, I believe. N From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Douglas Roberts Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 9:03 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] faith Well, speaking from my own (apparent) semi-unique perspective: Darwin's proposition of Survival of the Fittest would seem to scream out for the elimination of degenerate components of society which threaten to bring the entire species to total extinction. And, being an engineer, I cannot but cheer and encourage any activity that speeds the destruction of those destructive elements of society. Like gang conflicts, for example. And religion, for another. Not that there is much difference, really. --Doug On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Roger Critchlow r...@elf.org wrote: On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Steve Smith sasm...@swcp.com wrote: Tory - Why is the idea of two differing but synergistic approaches so challenging to so many on this list? Or are you arguing for the fun of the game? I'm pretty sure both the Monkey and the Weasel are in it for the endorphins released. I don't think I'm talking about two differing approaches. Some beliefs are so common that no one even thinks about them. Many people deny that they're beliefs at all. Other beliefs extend and explain and modify the common ones in different ways. But I say we're all believers on this bus, some are just more conscious of it. -- rec -- FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org -- Doug Roberts drobe...@rti.org d...@parrot-farm.net http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins 505-455-7333 - Office 505-670-8195 - Cell FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith
Thank you Nick, I was going to say the same thing. -Arlo James Barnes FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith
Still, irrespective of whomever coined that old fittest rubric, dead gang members are far more productive members of society than live ones, I suspect. On Sep 26, 2012 9:48 PM, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: Darwinism only says that the least prolific will be eliminated. It says nothing about degeneracy, unless, of course profligacy is defined as “advanced.” Spencer was the social Darwinist, not Darwin. In fact, it was SPENCER, who coined “the survival of the fittest”, I believe. ** ** N ** ** *From:* friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Douglas Roberts *Sent:* Wednesday, September 26, 2012 9:03 PM *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] faith ** ** Well, speaking from my own (apparent) semi-unique perspective: Darwin's proposition of Survival of the Fittest would seem to scream out for the elimination of degenerate components of society which threaten to bring the entire species to total extinction. ** ** And, being an engineer, I cannot but cheer and encourage any activity that speeds the destruction of those destructive elements of society. Like gang conflicts, for example. And religion, for another. Not that there is much difference, really. ** ** --Doug On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Roger Critchlow r...@elf.org wrote: On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Steve Smith sasm...@swcp.com wrote: Tory - ** ** Why is the idea of two differing but synergistic approaches so challenging to so many on this list? Or are you arguing for the fun of the game? I'm pretty sure both the Monkey and the Weasel are in it for the endorphins released. ** ** I don't think I'm talking about two differing approaches. ** ** Some beliefs are so common that no one even thinks about them. Many people deny that they're beliefs at all. Other beliefs extend and explain and modify the common ones in different ways. But I say we're all believers on this bus, some are just more conscious of it. ** ** -- rec -- ** ** FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org ** ** -- Doug Roberts drobe...@rti.org d...@parrot-farm.net http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins 505-455-7333 - Office 505-670-8195 - Cell ** ** FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith
I suspect that the more sensitive members of this list will think that my last message was unnecessarily pejorative with respect to gangs, and gang members. It would probably therefore be foolish of me to suggest including child-abusing priests, scientologists, and more than a few of the military industrial profiteers in the better off dead list. So I won't. Best to quietly just resume the scholarly discussions about faith. Don't you think? On Sep 26, 2012 10:03 PM, Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net wrote: Still, irrespective of whomever coined that old fittest rubric, dead gang members are far more productive members of society than live ones, I suspect. On Sep 26, 2012 9:48 PM, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: Darwinism only says that the least prolific will be eliminated. It says nothing about degeneracy, unless, of course profligacy is defined as “advanced.” Spencer was the social Darwinist, not Darwin. In fact, it was SPENCER, who coined “the survival of the fittest”, I believe. ** ** N ** ** *From:* friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Douglas Roberts *Sent:* Wednesday, September 26, 2012 9:03 PM *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] faith ** ** Well, speaking from my own (apparent) semi-unique perspective: Darwin's proposition of Survival of the Fittest would seem to scream out for the elimination of degenerate components of society which threaten to bring the entire species to total extinction. ** ** And, being an engineer, I cannot but cheer and encourage any activity that speeds the destruction of those destructive elements of society. Like gang conflicts, for example. And religion, for another. Not that there is much difference, really. ** ** --Doug On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Roger Critchlow r...@elf.org wrote: On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Steve Smith sasm...@swcp.com wrote:*** * Tory - ** ** Why is the idea of two differing but synergistic approaches so challenging to so many on this list? Or are you arguing for the fun of the game? I'm pretty sure both the Monkey and the Weasel are in it for the endorphins released. ** ** I don't think I'm talking about two differing approaches. ** ** Some beliefs are so common that no one even thinks about them. Many people deny that they're beliefs at all. Other beliefs extend and explain and modify the common ones in different ways. But I say we're all believers on this bus, some are just more conscious of it. ** ** -- rec -- ** ** FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org ** ** -- Doug Roberts drobe...@rti.org d...@parrot-farm.net http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins 505-455-7333 - Office 505-670-8195 - Cell ** ** FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith
The common theme, however, just to tie a bow on it, is societal degeneracy. On Sep 26, 2012 10:15 PM, Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net wrote: I suspect that the more sensitive members of this list will think that my last message was unnecessarily pejorative with respect to gangs, and gang members. It would probably therefore be foolish of me to suggest including child-abusing priests, scientologists, and more than a few of the military industrial profiteers in the better off dead list. So I won't. Best to quietly just resume the scholarly discussions about faith. Don't you think? On Sep 26, 2012 10:03 PM, Douglas Roberts d...@parrot-farm.net wrote: Still, irrespective of whomever coined that old fittest rubric, dead gang members are far more productive members of society than live ones, I suspect. On Sep 26, 2012 9:48 PM, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: Darwinism only says that the least prolific will be eliminated. It says nothing about degeneracy, unless, of course profligacy is defined as “advanced.” Spencer was the social Darwinist, not Darwin. In fact, it was SPENCER, who coined “the survival of the fittest”, I believe. ** ** N ** ** *From:* friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Douglas Roberts *Sent:* Wednesday, September 26, 2012 9:03 PM *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] faith ** ** Well, speaking from my own (apparent) semi-unique perspective: Darwin's proposition of Survival of the Fittest would seem to scream out for the elimination of degenerate components of society which threaten to bring the entire species to total extinction. ** ** And, being an engineer, I cannot but cheer and encourage any activity that speeds the destruction of those destructive elements of society. Like gang conflicts, for example. And religion, for another. Not that there is much difference, really. ** ** --Doug On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Roger Critchlow r...@elf.org wrote:*** * On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Steve Smith sasm...@swcp.com wrote:** ** Tory - ** ** Why is the idea of two differing but synergistic approaches so challenging to so many on this list? Or are you arguing for the fun of the game? I'm pretty sure both the Monkey and the Weasel are in it for the endorphins released. ** ** I don't think I'm talking about two differing approaches. ** ** Some beliefs are so common that no one even thinks about them. Many people deny that they're beliefs at all. Other beliefs extend and explain and modify the common ones in different ways. But I say we're all believers on this bus, some are just more conscious of it. ** ** -- rec -- ** ** FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org ** ** -- Doug Roberts drobe...@rti.org d...@parrot-farm.net http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins 505-455-7333 - Office 505-670-8195 - Cell ** ** FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith
And even the least prolific might manage to survive through a generation where they deserved extinction, such can be the luck of the draw. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegitimi_non_carborundum, but Darwin isn't going to help you on less than geologic time scales. -- rec -- On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:47 PM, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: Darwinism only says that the least prolific will be eliminated. It says nothing about degeneracy, unless, of course profligacy is defined as “advanced.” Spencer was the social Darwinist, not Darwin. In fact, it was SPENCER, who coined “the survival of the fittest”, I believe. ** ** N ** ** *From:* friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Douglas Roberts *Sent:* Wednesday, September 26, 2012 9:03 PM *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] faith ** ** Well, speaking from my own (apparent) semi-unique perspective: Darwin's proposition of Survival of the Fittest would seem to scream out for the elimination of degenerate components of society which threaten to bring the entire species to total extinction. ** ** And, being an engineer, I cannot but cheer and encourage any activity that speeds the destruction of those destructive elements of society. Like gang conflicts, for example. And religion, for another. Not that there is much difference, really. ** ** --Doug On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Roger Critchlow r...@elf.org wrote: On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Steve Smith sasm...@swcp.com wrote: Tory - ** ** Why is the idea of two differing but synergistic approaches so challenging to so many on this list? Or are you arguing for the fun of the game? I'm pretty sure both the Monkey and the Weasel are in it for the endorphins released. ** ** I don't think I'm talking about two differing approaches. ** ** Some beliefs are so common that no one even thinks about them. Many people deny that they're beliefs at all. Other beliefs extend and explain and modify the common ones in different ways. But I say we're all believers on this bus, some are just more conscious of it. ** ** -- rec -- ** ** FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org ** ** -- Doug Roberts drobe...@rti.org d...@parrot-farm.net http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins 505-455-7333 - Office 505-670-8195 - Cell ** ** FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] faith
Doug - Pretending to be one of the more sensitive members of the list, this sounds a lot like the only good Injun is a dead Injun... But that isn't what I want to take exception to... what I want to take exception to is that you or I or anyone else gets to decide that behaviours which offend us are somehow less fit than those we approve of. The fitness function is what it is, not what we want it to be... and there are many situations where what you and I would call incredibly offensive or bad behaviour is actually in some sick (by our measure) way, highly fit. Or as a corollary, you and I don't get to decide what the ideal society is and declare all antisocial (relative to that ideal) are unfit and will be culled. I would claim that some (all?) of the worst behaviours we know of are the precise result of natural selection. Our corrupt politicians, our paedophilic priests, violent gangs, etc *are* precisely what is being selected for. Maybe a case can be made for the opposite simultaneously... that kindness and altruism can also have a high fitness (at least for the group, if not the individual)... Darwinian selection works *through* extinctions... whatever is left after the presumed total extinction of our species will be what was selected for. Maybe the meek will inherit the earth. Maybe our presumed imminent anthropogenic extinction event will remove all vertebrate life or maybe just the meanest, most aggressive peoples of the earth (those with nuclear/biological/chemical weapons)? I contend it is a fanciful understanding of Darwinian Evolution to presume that it is going to cull what we find offensive or in fact dangerous to our own interests. Someone who believes (in doxastic terms, a peculiar or unstable reasoner?) that all drivers are out to get them when they are on a motorcycle (which has a high survival fitness while riding a motorcycle, but is nevertheless not correct) might also apply similar reasoning to natural evolution and fitness. Your rhetoric is compelling to me *as* rhetoric... I *like* the idea that gang members, prurient patriarchs and plutocratic politicians are somehow less fit for survival in the current milieu than you and I and all our present company... but that doesn't make it true. It seems to me that our role as conscious beings capable of forming societies is to not only form societies that meet our needs, but to (eventually) come to understand the complex dynamics of societies well enough to create and follow rules that not only *would seem to* lead to the ideals we seek, but in fact, *actually* lead to them? I think this is far from a solved problem, but many of us *are capable* of recognizing that first order cause-effect rules isn't sufficient. Forbid your priests to have sex while giving them absolute authority over the spiritual lives of their flock and *some* will become sex abusers... and in attempting to hide this consequence we end up institutionalizing it. Remove conventional social structures and opportunities for self esteem and material success from children and some will create their own through what we call gang activity. Let that go on for a generation or two and it will become endemic to our various socioeconomic landscapes (urban, suburban, rural, poor, middle class, rich, black, brown, yellow, red, white). Et cetera. Ad Nauseum. Illegimatus non Carborundum. Semper Fi. - Steve PS... I think I have got to take my thumb off this transmit switch! Still, irrespective of whomever coined that old fittest rubric, dead gang members are far more productive members of society than live ones, I suspect. On Sep 26, 2012 9:48 PM, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net mailto:nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: Darwinism only says that the least prolific will be eliminated. It says nothing about degeneracy, unless, of course profligacy is defined as advanced. Spencer was the social Darwinist, not Darwin. In fact, it was SPENCER, who coined the survival of the fittest, I believe. N *From:*friam-boun...@redfish.com mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Douglas Roberts *Sent:* Wednesday, September 26, 2012 9:03 PM *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] faith Well, speaking from my own (apparent) semi-unique perspective: Darwin's proposition of Survival of the Fittest would seem to scream out for the elimination of degenerate components of society which threaten to bring the entire species to total extinction. And, being an engineer, I cannot but cheer and encourage any activity that speeds the destruction of those destructive elements of society. Like gang conflicts, for example. And religion, for another. Not that there is much difference, really. --Doug On
