Friday, January 13, 2017

Science vs. Religion

Some things science get wrong. Does observing the effects of "a particle" prove the existence of "a particle"? The answer may be know at first, but with what degree of certainty, or perhaps it just suggests existence. That too may depend on how we define existence.

Religion, on the other hand, says seeing the effect of the belief of god proves the existence of god, while what it proves is the effect of believing, not existence and that cannot be disputed.

So is food addicting, or do people just act like sugar is addicting to some? The best test for this one is to take the sugar away and watch the discomfort for the first while. If that is not withdrawal, I do not know what is.

So does existence apply to all, or the real, or just the physical world?  So to get back to the ultimate question, if god is just a concept, residing beyond space and time, but the belief has an effect on those that believe, does god exist or does he only exist in the mind of the believer?  For sure there is no physical existence, so it all depends on the definition of existence.   So god does not exist in the real world, nor does mathematics!  That does not seem right.  So gods do not exist in the physical world, yet he or they exist in the conceptual world. What could be simpler or clearer? God does not exist in the physical world, and only in the conceptual world.

I am an easy to fatten person, a little bit of food is all I need, that is to say that my personal Attwater factors are high.  We have high efficiency livestock so why not humans in the human genetic mix? Consumption of any sugar is over-consumption for me. Sugar addiction is real. Emotional eating is real. Obsessive compulsive behavior in eating occurs in me. What other food/overeating/ drivers are there?

SO if there is no god, how does OA help some people? It gives them something to obsess over, and that take them directly to Schwartz step three, which is one solution to the obsession without understanding the problem.

  

Thursday, January 5, 2017

The Rise of Intelegence

In the last post, I talked about the the "fruit of intelegence". So when did all this happen?

How long do stories in the oral history persist?

Is it only ten or fifteen thousand years since we sapiens became self aware?

So the Jew/Christian were aware of the rise of intelligence. So is it the fifty thousand that anthropology suggests, so the typical less than ten thousand that oral histories suggest?

There are native North American native stories that tell of the great wall of ice in the Niagara region, which we geological types think 18000 thousand years might be the number, but then some of the archeologists suggest that the native have not been here that long. Others objects suggest that some skipped along the ice edge from Europe perhaps 25000 years ago, starting out from perhaps Spain. Later immigration along the west coast, and from Siberia also likely occurred. But these stories do not appear, or were these just normal events in the nomadic life style. Only the survivors tell the stories.  

Intelligence was not a rapid change but a gradual change, yet if a pair of intelligent got together, and produced two strong children every generation of 25 years, then in 40 generations, the number is greater than the worlds population. Our growth can be tremendous in a thousand years.  And our intelligence appears to growing slightly, or more correctly the amount of highly intelligence people seem to be growing within our population. But the medical industry is also keeping alive the less gifted and ungifted as well. Oh well, money talks, and when it is government money, no one ever makes an unpopular decision willingly since King Ralph of Alberta. 


Monday, January 2, 2017

Evolution

Have we evolved since we "ate the fruit of knowledge and were "ejected" from the Garden of Eden", or was that just the last big step in evolution? We likely had many small ones since.

The garden of Eden story suggest that life was good and food plentiful before we had knowledge, self awareness, and likely good memory. It is likely the Garden of Eden only existed in the fertile imagination of a story teller. It espouses that life was easier before we had knowledge. To know this would require accurate data to be passed down across generations without writing, which is unlikely.

I perceive that my life was easier the first forty years, for I was without pains of arthritis, the time to think and consider in the detail of today. For the first 14 years others were concerned about making a living. It was desperate when I look back. All this suggests that even in the bible the writer though that we had evolved from a human like form without knowledge. Oh well, it makes a good story. That is what the first art form was all about.

Now have we, as a species, just gone (or are going) through another big step in evolution as we discovered fossil fuels, steam, electricity, electronics, mass communications, and the like? Is the technology actually in the process of changing we humans? I expect that it has or will. We see the health situation changing extremely fast. We are coming up to a mass die-off, with major environment changes. It is unlikely we can turn this around. Oh well, in the end we all just die anyway.

 

Sunday, January 1, 2017

New Year therefore Make Changes, but why?

New Year therefore Make Changes, but why? Tradition. Is tradition a valid reason to do anything?

Just because it is new years, is it time to make changes, and if so what changes? There are likely some things we can change in our behavior to make life simpler for ourselves or not. The cause that originally started us down those behaviors must also be looked at. If the cause is still there and our behavior is a coping method, then until we either remove the cause or develop a new coping method, lasting change will not occur.

Are we addicted to a negative feeling that we keep trying to recreate, or keep recreating? We have a coping method for that negative feeling, and it is familiar. But is that negative feeling a defense method for some insane situation we live in? If we grew up under authoritarian parents, or permissive parents, we cannot be well balanced. We will have developed coping techniques, defense methods, survival methods, that later in life are not suitable, or provide the foundation for personality or philosophical issues.

Below our emotions that we recognize are likely feelings that we cannot identify as clearly, and our surface emotion may be a coping, defense, or survival method. Parents do not know everything, some know little useful information, and especially if they will not listen to the problem completely. Also, they have the residual of there own misconceptions to deal with as well as cultural change. Most people have "personality or belief issues" left over from earlier times. Some are actively teaching wrong concepts. Religion. It is these "cultural collective" wrong concepts that cause much of the problems we see in society today.

There are always conflicts between concepts, beliefs, desires, and people. When one, as a child is continually forced to submit, to do what the parent wants conflicts will arise. I was forced child labor on the farm I grew up on. That certinally does not go along with respect for parents, support your parents, etc. It is all about perceptions and cultural standards.

It is impossible to teach correct science concepts without offending the religious, that is those that hold traditional beliefs, and use these beliefs as defense against rational and scientific concepts. Oh well, I am right on this matter. Religion is the cause of most of the conflicts in the world. The remainder are from cultures and overpopulation. 

Wednesday, December 21, 2016

God No, Well Perhaps for Some

How do we define existence?
Or is god more like Schrodinger's cat, both exist and not exist at the same time?
Does something exist if we can see the effect of believing when we examine the lives of believers?

What I actually believe is twisted, but I need to explain it. Gods are at best concepts. Concepts are the only thing I know of which are beyond space and time. Concepts have no physical existence, but there existence can be inferred from there effect on people who believe. So, if we say that god is a concept only, then there is an effect which infers existence, but there is still no physical existence.
To believe is to use a full strength placebo, sort of effect. It is not real, but the effect is, to the point of having an effect. Based on observation the effect is real, yet we know that cause is only psychological. This, for some proves existence of a god.

So depending on the definition, god can be said to both exist and not exist at the same time, analogous to Schrodinger's cat. It all depends on the definition. We also see this in physics with some of the particles, where we cannot see the particle, only the effect. Some of this is waved off as a size issue. I have not yet heard a religious person claim there god is too small to see.

So we know now that god does not have a physical existence, but do concepts exist? Without a doubt, mathematics exists, yet has no physical existence. Schrodinger's cat. So god belongs to the concept class of objects that effects can be inferred but no physical existence in space nor time, and it's effects are equivalent to placebo effects. Well, OK.

This definition allows all people to be partly correct, or psychologically correct without understanding placebo effects, all the while praying to a non physical identity that is only an identity in their minds. So god only exists in the minds of the believer. End of.

After reading Peter Mickaelson, Why We Suffer, and seeing the multiple layers of emotion that Peter's muse conceives, while Buddha simplified it to "attachment to delusions", the placebo effect becomes a simple result of our "deadly flaw", or attachment to mental objects, emotions, thoughts, easily described as delusions. This we must learn to live with. For some, through a fluke of luck, the deadly flaw is weak, while for others it is strong. That attachment to our delusions is the basic problem, regardless or the delusion. The fourth Noble truth points to a solution for those of us with strong attachment to our delusions. Oh well, in the end we all just die anyway.   
 

Thursday, December 15, 2016

Exposing the Roots of Addiction

There is a lovely little book by Peter Michaelson that claims to expose the root of Addiction, and while it may expose some of the roots, it does not expose them all nor tell how to destroy the roots or plants very well. If exposure is sufficient to kill the root, than it is useful to expose those roots.

He does identify correctly that while AA/OA/NA are useful for treatment, the cause of the problem is still there, uncorrected. Exposure may be enough to stir our own responsibility for correction, and some of the common issues are aired enough to provide correction. Our secret attachments are toward those environment that we learned to live within, but are no longer suitable for life. We like to live in the familiar, for sure, so do we create the familiar over again, or is that all there really is, and we are forced back into the familiar because that is what there is?

Some of his unnecessary phrases, like a child, I find quite off-putting. Some of us were forced into a subservient positions because of control freak bosses, and subservient position was one of survival in the position. Unhealthy environments do not just exist in homes but in workplaces as well. What started in homes is often carried in business, especially in poor economies and by brutal tyrants such as Trump.   

So if I grew up largely unsupervised, ignored, but provided for physically, just one more body living in a busy farm, am I secretly seeking attention or avoiding attention by staying away from people to avoid harassment? School was a way to keep me out of the way, homework was a way to avoid work at home, but not completely. Oh well, I survived and left. I was not prepared for life in the City, but who would be. And then I got adjusted, life was shaping up, and the computer came along and the economy went for shit, and never really came back in my chosen industry. It had a few good years, intermittently, and in some areas. Just enough to keep hopes alive, but it never delivered on the promises. I kept on trying, for I judged it was easier to keep on then change to a different field.  Oh well.  

So back to exposing the roots of what may be an addiction.  

Sunday, December 11, 2016

I, Atheist

Coming out as a Atheist is equivalent to saying to my ancestors, relatives, and some friends, that you are wrong about your beliefs, I am right, and that is too bad. All the resentment between religions, the intolerance, bigotry, hatred, even persecution results from the innuendo of you are wrong, I am right is re-lite in the religious person. This is the natural response of being a faith/emotion/tradition based person rather than a hypothesis based thinking, logical person. I am sorry that we all cannot go through this mental evolution at once.

I recognize that religion got our society this far, but it is now time to let go of traditions and venture into the future in a rational manner, with our eyes wide open and hypothesis in hand, make decisions that are good for the world, ourselves, and others. With the indicators of climate change growing so wildly, and no rational political process available, we likely will be forced into action. So what is the rational response? Test for accuracy all that we know and project those forward and see what it points to. That is all is hypothesis, and there is likely no god, no after life, and that which is not common to most religions is likely wrong. Compassion, logic, reason, virtue... for other humans should be the foundation of treatment of others. Tradition, aka religion... intolerance, bigotry, persecution must go. We must determine what is right separately and together, based on science, evidence and truth not tradition or "scared texts."  For this I am responsible. 

The causes of climate change have passed the point of no return; carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is over 400ppm in the atmosphere, and methane is over 1600 ppb in the atmosphere. In 1960 these numbers were 280 and 500. The Arctic is 20 degrees C warmer, the September sea ice is down to 25% of 1960 levels, and methane hydrate is melting, releasing more methane about 200 times the rate it was in 1980. By 500 ppm Co2, we will be suffering. The second whammy will be methane at 3000 ppb. The third will be nuclear winter. Few others care so why should I? Oh well. 
    
The world cannot support this level of population, and nobody will voluntarily reduce their life style. We all are becoming protectionist, which is not a bad thing, I think. We have gone too far in trading, and not in producing everything we can ourselves. Oh well, the carbon dioxide and methane will likely finish us baby boomers off. The survival of our species is at stake here and now.
  
I am not going to take on any of these issues, but knowing the obvious, sit back and watch the young whirl away. Until there is a government in power that places the people first, the problem will not be resolved. Note that I did not say solved, for the only solution is reduction in world population back to 3.5b or so and stabilized industry of profitable carbon fixing established. We are the species at risk, if this is not done soon. We current humans do not do well in a methane rich atmosphere. The next sapient species may be able to breath in a methane rich atmosphere. Oh well. 
We see that the only solution to radical Islam is there extermination, and radical christian attacks on Islam is similar response, we see the non rational evangelists deigning reality of evolution and rational development. We see the "out of sequence" artifacts as possible evidence of seeding DNA onto earth, and we know we are not the first nor alone in this universe. The third mass extinction is just irrelevant, as there is only one species we should be concerned with. 
When I was a young fellow in high school we talked about overpopulation, and potential climate change. Then it was particulate and dust that was the concern, nuclear winter scenario that was prevalent. We beat that but dust may be part of the solution for methane overload solution.

So here I sit, part of the problem, but unable and unwilling to go against the world, but need to. The first step is declaring the reality of one of the many problems, and start to develop a solution for myself.