Friday, August 11, 2017

Solution?

What upsets people is not things themselves but their judgments about the things.” --- one of those old dead Greeks or Romans..

So is the solution to simply quit thinking about what is right and true. Is it to allow others to live in their delusions? Reality is simple. Why do other chose to live in non-reality?

So it is not my problem. What I eat is my problem. What I do is my problem.

So what we eat controls our hormones, and our hormones control whether food is stored or available for energy, therefore we have quzi-control over how long before we get hungry, or do we. Some people suggest we do, but it is sloppy control.

It is no fun going through life hungry. So what is the solution?

Thursday, August 10, 2017

So now that we know the cause

So now that we know the cause, does this lead to a solution beyond just stop doing it?

Last time we learned to separate food addition from compulsive eating. These have different causes, and food addiction treatment is stopping eating all of specific foods, like sugar, wheat, starches, and for some dairy products. So what is the symptoms of too few carbohydrates? Thick mucus is one problem. Beyond that, we may become ketonic, and bad body ordur, specific sweating body order is a problem, for those who are sensitive to that ordur. Oh well, what I smell like is other peoples problem.

Now on to the less well defined compulsive eating, a trained in reaction to stress, boredom, indecision, no reasonable solution conditions, living with a nasty person, a bad environment, or what ever. We need to learn other ways to deal with the situation, and also our reaction, for the reaction will continue after the situation has been resolved, if it can be resolved. There is also the other condition, the situation goes on unresolved, for there is no solution, and we need to learn to live with it. That is all fine and good, but when there is no solution, can we learn to live with the problem and not eat?

So consider when we live with a religious person and we know there is no god. You say there is, so put one piece of legally admissible piece of evidence on the discussion table... Of course, they cannot, for at best god is a concept, and if you believe that concept, then he is real to you, and the effect is real to you. It is that simple. So how does one break the delusion of others? And when they a busy pushing there falsehoods and those around them, nonstop. Do you suppose that could ingrain a few bad thinking processes in the mind?  

There is no solution beyond physical separation, mental separation, completely.  

Wednesday, July 26, 2017

Tarman's Separation

Vera Tarman of Food Junkies has put together part of the solution. Separation of food addiction and compulsive overeating. Food addiction is, as it sounds pure addiction to a food, usually sugar and white wheat flour, which raises blood sugar faster than pure sugar. Treatment is complete abstinence of sugar in all forms, and after several months, some relief in the desire is obtained.

Sugar, and wheat products stop being food, stop being even considered to be eatable. The problem dissipates.

Compulsive overeating is a different kettle of fish, and some of us have both issues. Food addiction must be the first to be addressed with a low carb diet.

Now on to compulsive eating. It is a learned behavior, and can be unlearned, with difficulty. It is often the result of using food to deal with all problems, emotions, feelings, anxiety, boredom, lack of interest in anything, free time, anything. Now we must learn to deal with all these things, from our native culture food pushing, to deal with nasty parents, abuse, and all the above list. When we learn to deal with those issues, we have an alternative method of cooping and should not need to eat over the issue, well in theory at least.

So no we need to recognize that we use food before the feeling, or emotion has even fully formed, we are eating and the issue has gone away. We need to stop eating and allow the feeling to develop; and deal with the cause of the feeling. Boredom and uninterested are the two big ones for me today, I just do not care about anything or anyone. That is dangerous. Being in continual low joint pain, and generally tired but not sleepy is also dangerous situation. Not wanting to socialize is also bad, but as I was religiously abuse in my youth, very low social need was the result.

Now add this to always being physically hungry, for some unknown reason, and you may start to understand the problem.     

Monday, July 24, 2017

Not within our control

My comment did not post so here it is, more or less:

https://howtobeastoic.wordpress.com/2017/07/24/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-dichotomy-of-control/

“Some things are within our power, while others are not. Within our power are opinion, motivation, desire, aversion, and, in a word, whatever is of our own doing; not within our power are our body, our property, reputation, office, and, in a word, whatever is not of our own doing.”

Not all of our desires are within our control. Our brain chemistry may be getting messed up, or it never was for all the population. Perhaps some segments are not all there; perhaps some of us are less evolved. Perhaps the wrong word was used in translation, or the concept behind the word has changed. Does desire include our biological imperatives, even when they are " run amuck" ?  Or are control of our desires just a philosophers wet dreams. Is the concept of control different for different people? I just do not know, but the statement that we have control of our desires is now bullshit. Perhaps it is more like we humans have changed or our environment has changed so much.

Ultimately, what I am getting at is some desires are biological, and not in our complete control, or not in our control all the time. Philosophy does not need to address reality. We living people do.

Perhaps it is more like in those time the possibility did not exist; therefore, we did not know of the possibility, hence, we could not even dream it. As I sit here, craving foods, after my allowed breakfast, I call bullshit on Epictetus's statement that we have control over all our desires.

When we start examining desires, we always find strange things. Consider obesity and alcoholism.  Now before you bring up AA's success rate, you must realize that AA is as effective as the "maturing out rate". See Straton Peele on that point. AA is a plan that is base on a falsehood, but it works for those who believe but never look at the evidence critically... just accept the sweet bullshit stories of religions. I use bullshit as the expression of not knowing and not caring of the truth of the statements. There is no other word for it.


    

Sunday, July 23, 2017

having lived through

Eating disorders are not fun. We are driven to eat by ourselves, against what we know to be good for ourselves, and are unable to stop the behavior. We have a split person, the body driving us to eat, and the mind knowing we must stop; the body always wins long term. So is there any solution? Well we need to stop the overeating, but the body is not stopping.

So the solution is letting go of the desire to eat, and stopping... and living with the desire... that does not stop... living with that nagging gnawing hunger that food takes away and provides relief from... for a while... and the medical community knows about but can provide no treatment beyond body mutilation.... that typically does not last anyway. From my years around programs, I must know thirty people who had various forms of gut mutilation and none of them were successful long term. That suggests that none of the problems were solved... the wrong problem was addressed... the eating disorder is in the head likely... so what is the solution to changing such desires... it is now my opinion that nobody knows... or is offering any evidence of a solution beyond hyper-vigilance and self forcing, self control against the body doing... eating.

Now those without eating disorders do not understand the feeling likely. It might be something like the gays feel, being drawn to an action with is not what most would classify as not normal, yet are drawn to it. A parallel could be drawn. Is it the same misappropriation of desires? But with the food, acting on results in obesity. So this is really the question, how does one recover? Just stop overeating... well obviously... but can a gay just stop the behavior... or a religious just stop believing the idiocy...



     

Tuesday, July 4, 2017

OO Overcoming Overeating

Overcoming overeating by Jane Hirschmann is a book that claims to understand and provide a solution to this problem. It does not address the other situation, when the gut hunger is just too large. It separates out the non hunger munchies from hunger and speaks to dealing with the munchies as the cause of overeating. Just eat when you are physically hungry.

Hirschmann claims that the munchies are caused by being trained to reach for food rather than to allow the feelings to develop and deal with the feelings. Ya ok. It still comes down to just stop eating.  

Monday, June 26, 2017

Stopped Caring

I have stopped caring about how wrong other people are. It is not my concern if they are delusional, they will just carry on into the walls, or where ever they end up. Dead likely. We all end there anyway. Let us look at the extreme case, so that we can see this more plainly.

They may continue to use drugs, as much as they want, live in delusion and why should I care, they do not hear a word I say, so why should I care? If they wish to use fentanyl and/or carfentanil, why should I care, just prepay the funeral cost and get on living.  It is as Epictetus suggests, "when you kiss your child good night, reminder yourself that this may be the last time" or some such negative visualization, and then you will not be hurt as much when or if it really happens. So what if the case is just a delusion?

I have learned there is no god, but it is not my place to teach this to others unless they start pushing their beliefs, and then I rebel. Any public ...."Let us pray" ... is a assumption that we all are christian or something. They as well should sacrifice a chicken, then we could eat at least. In the public setting, That is an invitation to respond in a negative way, a non christian way. Face backwards, or east, or sit or something. Yet why go into a christian house and refuse in an obvious way. If you go into a christian home willingly, behave as acceptable to a christian even if you do not believe.

There  is no god. the only god exists in the mind of the believer as a delusion, for there is no evidence of one existing. Yet saying that I am atheist seems to be an open invitation for the evangelist to try to change or correct my view. Not any more, for I shall stand my ground. Give me physical proof or fuck off.    

Saturday, June 24, 2017

wysiwyg

Pronounced:  wizzy wig 

What you see is what you get. This was a term from the early days of computer and html editing. It also applies to atheism. It is reality, no life after death, no afterlife, no judgement, no god, no soul. WYSIWYG. That it, that's all. It is up to any religion to prove there is more before I could believe.

I meant to save not post, oh well. WYSIWYG, what more need to be said. It says it all. The whole world of concepts is just that, a world of concepts, ideas, day dreams. Religion have the same foundation as do comic books, graphic novels, fiction of any kind, and the like. The bible and quran mix in some history, so they become historic novels. So if it is not real, it may fiction, mixed with a few true facts, but how does one separate facts and fiction presented as fact. Then, on the other hand, what does history have to do with our present actions? We see how other did something, and what was the outcome? Tomorrow? Did they all survive to see another day? Were they the same people, or were they forever changed and not for the better? Those two "holy books" are filled with vial actions and deeds,  which should not be repeated. That is the secrete lessons in the books. Never do what is written about. WYSIWYG.

WYSIWYG is a real philosophy. It is the philosophy of atheism, there is no god, and as proof, WYSIWYG. There is no soul, WYSIWYG. There is no afterlife, WYSIWYG. It is up to the religious to show me otherwise.

You can fuck with the brain by concentrating on one thing for extended time, or practice talking to an imaginary friend or council until you think they are real. These are not WYSIWYG. Learning critical thinking, ABCDEFG, and most people do not get beyond B for biases, WYSIWYG leads to clean thinking and all the way to G, good, goal, the plan, virtue as the old greeks called it. It is all dependent on what you think. 

Thursday, June 22, 2017

Craig - Bullshit

William Lane Craig    Yada, yada, yada, therefore god is the best explanation.   Yada, yada, yada, and we do not know therefore god is the best explanation. We do not know therefore god. For everything god is always a supernatural explanation. It is not a real one. That is the problem. God is not an explanation of anything but a excuse for not thinking. Gods at best are just concepts, but the religious will never admit such. Oh well, turmp and the US can have them.

I find all religion and those forcing their fake supernatural concepts into our faces very off putting. I do not want to even look at some peoples facebook posts because of there religious content. I do not want to speak to many of my religious relatives. It is just so off putting; their total nongrasp of reality. What is a person to do. Walk away from all my relatives? Yes, what else is there?

Monday, June 19, 2017

There Is No God

This note has been assembled in response to two separate requests.

Saying that there is a god does not make it so. I can go long with not questioning something until the need arises, but when the need arises, we need to be able to justify that belief or question it and have a response. Handing the belief to the previous generation may not be sufficient. The time is now to understand and defend your belief in a god, and your belief that there is a god. If you are unable the likely reason is there is no god.   

The religions cannot agree on a god, therefore there is a possibility all religions are wrong about the existence of a god. When I examined the question, going back to first principles, and the rules of evidence, working forward with two hypotheses, there is no god vs there is a god, and placing only positive statement, with estimated probabilities, the no god side comes out in front. It is not close, for there is no evidence that points to a god.

In an critical thinking issues, we first need to eliminate biases as much as possible, and become aware of the biases where they cannot be eliminated. We need to eliminate fallacies like "we do not yet know therefore god" arguments, as well as the other forty most common fallacies of logic. At that point we are ready to start laying down the deviation of the dueling hypothesis, one line at a time. Keep in mind that verbosity and time pressure are not part of the logic, when one gets through each argument, for and against, based on logic, nothing remains in the pro god hypothesis. So one is forced to conclude there is no god, logically. There remains a weak possibility of some sixth force out there, after the main four, weak, strong, elector-magnetic, gravity and the fifth, dark.

Existence is the next issue that need definition. Concepts exist, at least in the minds of people, yet have no physical existence and therefore do not in fact exist. If you choose to include concepts in your definition of existence, god exist to you, and if not, gods do not exist. This does not challenge concepts or that belief of concepts can influence the lives of believers, and those around. It only challenges the the physical existence of a god. Those who say god is beyond space and time place there god into the concept field, beyond space and time. So they do not want to acknowledge that there god is just a concept, with real impacts on the lives of believers, but remains a concept only with no physical existence. So if there is a god, it is in the realm of concepts, not physical, so therefore god does not exist, the believers only think that god does exist. It is all quire logical by confusing as the existence depends on if concepts are included or excluded.

So is your god a concept or a physical object? That is the dividing line of faith verses reality. Once one decides, god is either a concepts, or the hard truth of reality, no god. If you chose to say that there is a god and he is real, then you are living in a fairy land; an untruthful world of not understanding and separation of the details of logic. 

All reality can be divided in to actions, physical objects and concepts.

The religious typically will not take on this argument. First there "holly" books cannot be use, only logic from starting hypothesis from first principals and without the fallacies of logic. They also like distraction and verbosity, flooding the field with much noise and verbosity, and no logic. When they lose, they cannot accept it and they just go away. Without settling this what is god issue, the foundation of any religion is like Ron Hubburt or J Smith or whoever.

Oh well, in the end we all just die anyway.   

And here is a list of what atheists are not: http://godlessmom.com/9-things-atheist-does-not-mean/ 

Saturday, June 17, 2017

Equal Rights

I do not have a problem with equal rights, I do have a problem with others telling me what I am going to do, and believe. There is no gods, no souls, no afterlife. You can believe what ever foolishness you wish to believe, but do not try to force it on me, or put it in my face, else it will be back onto you, hard.

Equal right for the gays is fine, but what they want is not equal but superior. The two spirited peoples make up something less than 10% of the population, and are not going anywhere. If they wish to play at marriage, well, it is easier to let them than resist, as marriage has become something that most do not take seriously anymore anyway. Originally, it was intended as one of the method of better odds at reproduction and survival of the children. The other plan of nature is to spread lots of " seed " and hope for the best. The second is looked down on by the more stable agrarian cultures but preferred some cultures and individuals. To which do you belong?

The idiot muslims seem to thing that they have the right to push their views onto others, and christians also to some extent. They are wrong, that simple. We also have the right to resist and to strike back. But they do not have those rights; equality and equal rights makes that right impossible, else we will be at war. Muslims want all us non believers dead, according to there quran. Oh well, there is no god, no souls, no afterlife. It is all just superstition and old cultures.

So the next question is should those of us who have been freed from the chains of religion, and move on, be around those who are still stuck in those old cultures? Should we stick them every time they push their beliefs out in public or at us, or be polite and keep quite? When they praise their god publicly, we can ridicule them, I think. They raised the concept, pushed it on us, so we push back. That is equal rights.    

Sunday, June 11, 2017

Race vs. Culture.

https://the-orbit.net/progpub/2017/06/11/racism-round-6-10-17/

Races are different and do exist. That is a fact. Different cultures behave differently. Race and culture are consistent, interlocked within a community. So is it a racial issue or a cross culture issue? How do we separate the two? Culture is a function of habitual behaviors, generational behaviors, and usually within one race. So when we say it is a racial issue, is it a racial or a cultural issue? I suggest that the US black/white issue is cultural as is the Canadian white/Indian problem. As a white who has been "run off a reservation", I will say that the Indian culture is an old and non adaptive culture who likes to think that being here first, well at least a few of there ancestors, gives them special status, and the right to be kept. Our ancestors agreed with there ancestors, but then they reproduced like rabbits. Now there is a problem. Can we afford to support the Indians in a style to which they would like to be accustom?

The government can sit back an import any number of groups, Syrians, or Boat People. They do not mix, but rather establish ghettos or enclaves. These separate culture communities, like the Indians are hostile to the surrounding white communities, one culture, one religion, one race. Race is used as a visual identifier. Some we can spot a mile off, as soon as we can see them. When the Indians cause problems, we do not want to be around them. The government has different rules for handling them so we and they do not mix, willingly. Our Indians have a light fingered culture, it is there culture. It is also there culture to like the drink, and to trust the predators and take risks. And then they wounder why so many of there ladies turn up dead. Predators exist, and there culture will suffer until they individually take responsibility for themselves. Is that racist or reality?

The white culture is vial, brutal, aggressive, no compassion, no understanding, but we are the dominate culture. The business person must be so to survive. Bigger companies and government are more humane, for they need employees to survive. Oh well, in the end we all just die anyway.     

Friday, June 2, 2017

trump, Climate Change Denier

trump Climate Change Denier, I will no longer give trump any respect, Christopher Higgins did to god.

I do not understand his position.

He is unwilling to chance economic damage from addressing the whole climate change issue?  The remainder of the world will be screaming "go home Yankee" once more. This attitude of bullying is not going to help them in the least. The future of the world is at steak and you are looking out for yourself. You can die alone, as no one will buy your products. 

He does not believe human activities are increasing Co2 levels. Just look at our production of Co2, and the take off in the mid 1960. Co2 is proportional to the population, at least crudely so. Green technology will be the future in some form. Conservation, and green energy production, along with life style requiring less carbon footprint.

He does not believe warming climate is caused by rising Co2 levels. Science proved this in 1974.

So I do not understand trump. If we as a civilization are going to recover, or perhaps even survive, we will need to act together, tolerance, and education of the third world level peoples, even those living as the third world in Canada, Natives and street peoples. Welfare are not included, even though they have nothing, they live with heat and water, sanitation, communications, and the like. I just do not understand trump. He has the right to do as he likes, but bad press gets him Kathy Griffin pictures.

What is there to understand about the irrational beyond they are irrational. So who is the leader of the free world now? Not trump. Angela Merkel? Not Theresa May.

Monday, May 29, 2017

Special Privilege

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/lethbridge-high-school-grad-party-1.4133490
http://globalnews.ca/news/3482457/cowboys-and-indians-themed-grad-party-draws-reaction-from-lethbridge-school-and-students/

Special Privilege - So the Indians think that they can tell us what we can and cannot do? Just like the Muslims and drawing Mohammad and calling there religion crap belief system, or saying the truth, there is no god.

If we cannot speak the truth for fear of offending someone, tough. They will need to learn to live with it. They have been trained to take offense.

“Speak up though,” Quesnelle said. “If you’re offended by something or something’s going on, don’t be afraid to say something, get it out there, that’s the only way it’s going to stop.”

Ya sure, but it is none of your business, and we are offended by you sticking your nose in where it is not wanted. 

Mixed races just does not work. 

Sunday, May 28, 2017

The US has become a hick country

The donald does not believe we humans are responsible for some of climate change, nor willing to do his part to keep this world livable. He is protectionist in his actions yet verbally at G7 against protectionism. The donald is obtaining Russian support.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/05/report-trump-is-planning-to-pull-out-of-paris-climate-deal.html

So the only conclusion is donald is a liar, two faced, scheming ..., and the US people got the government they deserve. The US is now a hick country. No respect any more. Fear yes, but not any respect as they whirl in their death spiral downward.

Enough

Friday, May 26, 2017

Questions

What is it about the mind that allows the mind to control the body some of the time, but not all the time?

What is it about the mind that allows the body to control the mind some of the time?

What is there in the mind that we always have control over? our opinions?

Well sort of  but at times, I just do not want to do anything or I just want to do nothing may be a more correct way of putting it, or I want to do something else, but other reason keeps me from doing it. Indecision. Lack of energy. Laziness. Lack of drive to chase after a goal or objective. Contemplation. Mental regurgitation. Lack of any good choices.

Why does our mind allow us to hold a obviously wrong view? Well, we need to update our views. We need to take the time to think thing through. We must remember what we know, and each time we learn something new, our entire view must be updated. It is like saving a freshly edited copy over the old one. Save vs Save As. As we learn, some things become obvious, after the fact. Some of our old ideas are just wrong. We need to Save over top of the old wrong, or tag the old wrong as wrong or crap.

We live physically by competence before comprehension, but think comprehension before competence. That is the root problem of obesity. We continue to eat as we did, all the while living in a slower metabolism body. We overeat, and obtain short term satiation, but to obtain satiation, we need more food than we physically need. Life is a bitch, and then we die.

We can stop desiring of some things. Why is it so difficult to stop desiring food?

Religion: why is it so difficult to correct the view of the believer?  They are not willing to learn and implement new knowledge it it requires deletion of existing beliefs.  It is similar to how much to eat. Is that why it is so difficult to get ourselves to change? We do not accept that some things are not food? Just like religion, some is just bullshit. Why is it so difficult to understand this? Why is it so difficult to see? Because we recognize the familiar and assume the familiar is right.

I saw a video of a Muslim trying to use geology to "prove" the existence of god. It just does not fly to a Geotech. In that moment I became aware of the solution, education to reality. But the earth can only sustain 3.5 billion people to keep Co2 stable, so the solution will come in the form of a superbug or the like. In the mean time, we must educate. And learn. But first I must train myself to not eat much.


Tuesday, May 16, 2017

Seperation of god and beleifs


Even if your beliefs are based on an abstract god, there is a separation between your beliefs and any concept of god that you may carry. I use "your" because I know there is no physical evidence of a god, and lots of physical evidence pointing at non-existence, or no powers, or no willingness to do anything much. Anything that happens to you or I is in the physical world.

So back to the divide between out beliefs and any concept of god. Once the god-foundation is gone, our beliefs need to be examined, and that is where the big issue comes, the step from just atheist, to realism, or philosophy, or what do we call it? There is the Church of Reality who has tried to answer the big questions for himself, but he need to condense and detail it much more. There are the no god religions like Buddhism, that with a few "cross outs" become a reasonable belief system, and then there is Stoicism that provides some of the foundation concepts, but not the details. Together these form a loose system of operating instructions with holes.

These do not address the other personality issues, like the lack of desire to be around people much, or the lack of motivation to do many things to occupy the time. I have a mental list of jobs to do around here, but no energy, motivation, enthusiasm, enough to do them. Oh well.

Now for a bit more evidence that there is no god or the bible is just the wet dreams of men or the like: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2017/05/16/this-virginia-atheist-painted-an-offensive-bible-verse-on-his-truck-to-prove-a-point/  
any god who recommended such a statement would know that that statement is just ludicrous. Cats and women do pretty much as they please, and it is up to men and dogs to understand this and to accept it.

My core beliefs are in "nature" and she does as she pleases, after following the chemical and physically laws. But that is not true, we just cannot account for all the factors in our models; and then there is the rising Co2 and CH4. An essential belief is "my beliefs control my behavior" and also that "I can change my beleifs"; and "truth should be an assumed virtue".  Before we say the stoic phrases; that virtues are the only goods. That living the virtues only are necessary and sufficient for a good life. Understanding the nature of truth and going through life spreading truth, correcting untruth like religions, is sufficient and necessary for the good life. Oh well. Correcting untruth like religion is leading with the chin, so knowing and living well without a god may be sufficient. Enough.  

Tuesday, May 2, 2017

As our knowledge of prehistory ravels

https://www.wired.com/2017/04/130000-year-old-mastodon-threatens-upend-human-history/

I am surprised, not that pre-Clovis existed, but that we found evidence that old. These peoples must have been Neanderthal or similar. That explains the high percentages of Neanderthal DNA found among the Native populations of the north west US, western Canada. So some where in prehistory, some group of Neanderthals wandered into the Americas, likely across the Bearing Straight. But wait, camels are North American, so flow was both ways, and camel bits are found in the arctic also.

The really surprising part is not that there was/is evidence, but that we found the evidence. That may mean that there was a civilization there, in San Diego area. 

There could not have been great quantities of peoples, but there must have been some wandering tribes to mix with the later peoples that came from various sources. Did those wandering groups see each others as enemies or as potential mates, sources of different technologies, as potential allies?

Was there relation ship similar to the other tribes part of Old Testament times; kill all the males,(well all the adult males at least) screw all the females, or take them as slaves, wives, etc.

https://evolutionistx.wordpress.com/2017/02/06/race-the-social-construction-of-biological-reality-pt-3/

https://evolutionistx.wordpress.com/2017/01/30/visualizing-race-an-essay-in-three-images/ 

There is no doubt that we human subspecies are self-centered, we try to increase our genes in our species. This is the true human nature. Doing what is natural is what brought up to this state of over-population. Soon something will need to be done to correct this over-population problem. One child solution anyone? Have one, father one, and be neutered. That will bring population into line in a few generations or so.

Sunday, April 30, 2017

Developing our own Philosophy.

A post about life. "I do not know what I think until I say it." That is a quote in concept from some author, but I do not recall who, it is just the way it seams when I am required to answer some question.

I am trying for coach certification in archery, through the NCCP. One of the questions is what is my coaching philosophy? Well, to put words to that is a bit of examination:

I am a realist. Gods are all in the heads of others. I ignore this important issue in the archery club, however I often state it, when asked to coach on long weekends.  I am an atheists, so it is not like the day means anything special to me.

I emphasis the process, not the outcome. As recreational modern traditional archer, the scoring is not important, just the process of shooting. It is as the stoics say about shooting a arrow, once the hand is relaxed and the arrow off, all is beyond our control. Competency and comprehension are required, I like to teach the comprehension first.

Student enthusiasm and enjoyment are necessary for enduring participation in the sport, along with suitable equipment. Some outside muscular work, aka exercises, will be required, along with adequate proteins and fats for muscular development. 

I like instructing the adults, beyond the middle teens, that want to learn archery. If they are there for social reasons, are the chatty type, I stop making the effort to correct obvious bad methods or to do individual teaching. They are just spaces in the class. My method is to go through each step of the process in detail, and show the typical poor methods and better methods. For some bad form is the only way they can shoot, and bad form is better than not shooting. After safety is followed, the only wrong way to do archery is to not do it.

Yesterday, we coached a Muslim group, who needed to stop halfway through to pray.  I need a bit of tea anyway. I wanted to say it is all in your heads, but I figured that that would be just rude, but true. I think it is rude of them even to ask to take time off archery.  False information in their heads is their problem. Me, pointing it out would not help them nor me, it is just not my problem. It is like all those who suggest fat people should just go on a diet. Stay to the archery subject at hand, archery in this case.  There are many many issues in archery classes; inappropriate attire, those who will not put down purse, or electronics, those who do not want to be there, and those who do not have the mental capacity to pay attention. I mind my own business, and I make no effort to help those who are not helping themselves. 

enough




 






Friday, April 21, 2017

Releasing the God hypothesis

Be aware: Free association....

The old stories contain many historical hypothesis. I call these historical because I do not like William James's name as dead hypothesis. They may be dead, but dead has the implication that is brutal toward those that believe those hypothesis. We still need to live with those believers until we can convince they of reality or one of us die off. So call me an apologist if you like, first I need to know what I believe, and until I communicate beliefs, I just am not sure. Even then, I may change my beliefs, or may not express them exactly. Impermanence of beliefs is something that I have.

I was told to believe, and tried but it was bullshit; became agnostic and tried to believe to get the benefits of living in a delusion. Life is tough and living in a delusion, if you can, has the benefit of not needing to stare into the abyss of reality. My parents were able to live like that; and I tell you there are advantages to being able to put reality out of your mind. Many things do not bother those who can live in their delusions. I both pity them and admire them. Conflicted. What?

I know there is no physical evidence of a god, and there are many hypothesis that suggest there is one. Purpose is often sighted, and is the how did it become this way if not designed and or constructed. These are human questions and the real answer is we do not know, or that we have reluctance to admit that we do not know. It is the creative sort of human that creates a story, a hypothesis that describes or prescribes the how of the artifacts existence, as if to answer a child's question with a story. This may be in fact, how the hypothesis came to be. "Because god did it, now go away and let me work in peace" was a refrain I recall hearing many times.

It is just easier to acknowledge the existence of a historical hypothesis, and move on rather than calling in a myth; the half truth is dependent on our point of view, and correct without being as offensive. Hypothesis can be replaced by better hypothesis rather than proven or not dis-proven. This can go back to Laplace and his no need of the god hypothesis in explaining the path of planets in retrograde or was it the Saturn wobble. And is that the same Laplace of Laplace transforms in mathematics? You bet. And if you did cover Laplace transforms, as in engineering school and do not still remember what they are, they are like nests in software, but without counters. In short, apply the transform, solve the equations, take the transform out and reduce to a simpler, cleaner and useful form. It make my head ache just thinking about them that I have not touched since University, and am now retired from active working. Oh well, in the end we all just die anyway. 

The thing about hypothesis are we can modify and make the old one a historical, and thereby ratchet toward reality and understanding. We new atheists are beyond the early adopters stage, on the cusp of rapid growth to the cash cow if it were a new product. It is all about turning reality into a money generating industry. This new atheistism is the next evolution of man, man's thinking moving toward rational thought, and away from the historical hypothesis that got us to this stage. The major dieoff required is coming. Will it be nuclear war, rise of carbon dioxide, methane, climate change, asteroid, supervolcano, superbug, ... any body's guess and when? It does not matter. In the end we all just die anyway.  
     

Monday, April 17, 2017

More Comparsion of Buddhism, Stoicism and Epicureanism

The original purpose of belief systems (aka religions) can generally be defined as a system of thoughts, beliefs, values, principles that end personnel mental suffering or uncertainty through providing a life plan, knowledge list, behavior directions, priories, clarifications or how to live and treat others. Ethics, morality, decision making methods are often included. A system to end mental suffering is how Buddha defined his purpose. He went on to define the cause of suffering: expectations, delusions, attachment, aversions and provide a list of eight areas to examine and correct in our lives. Stoicism provided the correct way of thinking, a complete operating system to upgrade to. Epicureanism went further and suggested areas to eliminate that often create issues.  

So the question is "how much of each system should the modern human adopt" to make life run better?

Some portion of relief of suffering is confidence that we are right. Doubt goes away. We can achieve this confidence by being part of a group that believes "x, y, z" or we can come to know that we are right through science, examination, testing, and/or association with like minded individuals. We can go against the flow of others as individualists only if we have the knowledge and confidence we are truly right.

All these three named thought systems place knowledge in their priorities. But the thoughts are not the same, but similar. With all the translation to get to English, along with the inexactness of language, how can we say that the original concept is not the same, but with the order and emphasis just different?

Much of Epicureanism just falls away as our science today is 2000 year ahead of what Epicurus knew and surmised. Yet stay out of things that will call us unneeded stress and worry is still good advice. Keep your oars where they belongs. Do not overreach. Do not overextend yourself too much, over
extension will cause stress. And minimization of our needs and intakes is sound finical advice. If we can do it is a totally different issue. Stay out of slippery places if we have fear of slipping. Stay sober, even when we drink.

Secular Buddhism cleans out the unreal items of reincarnation, and leaves karma as what it really is, reputation. Reputation is critical in long term relationships, especially is business. Yet we change over time, and some of us do not retain relationships well. Impermanence, the flipside of constant change is without a doubt just a derivative of change, aka the rate of change and whether we are able to see the change.

Danial Dennett has described the modern 'no self' reality, where consciousness is the mind observing the input/output flow but not yet understanding how the processing is done. Competence without comprehension. It is all knowledge we each can pick up if we put the effort, concentration and mindfulness in and just do it in our speech, actions and livelihood. Our intentions and attitudes provides the motivations.

One cannot separate the consciousness state from the objects of that state, as said Husserl, it is all in our heads anyway. Truth is the fundamental issue, and the non existence of a physical god is an essential and foundation fact. Until we can accept that, the truth is kind of nebulous, like ownership of a feral cat. Yet we can, in the mind of the believer have a god, the object of the mind, and live withing that god conscious state, not in full truth, but in full delusion. Many people will do all they can to keep living in that pink delusion where there is a god. It is the job of ever atheist to prick there mental balloon, or at least the balloons of the young. In the end we all just die off anyway, so if we can keep the young living in reality, we will do good.  
 

    

Wednesday, April 12, 2017

No God Husserl

Edmund Husserl 1851-1938  One cannot separate the consciousness state from the objects of that state.

WTF. So if you think there are ghosts, then, for you, there are ghosts... If you think there are gods, then, for you, there are gods. So gods are all in the mind of the believer, ok but Husserl never said that, he never spoke of gods, but he lived in pre-war Germany.

Religion and god is all in the mind of the believer. End of story. So why do so many people have difficulty in seeing this? Well we were taught wrong, and we do not like to look at our beliefs, likely because of fear of finding that our beliefs are wrong.

We humans are born a blank slate, and everything is learned, some is created along the way. We learn on the genetic substrata, some parts are learned easily, other parts we need to struggle with. Nobody teaches that we should review what we believe, what we were taught to believe, and own our own beliefs. Buddha and Confucius were more right than Christians. Buddhist, other than reincarnation and extreme emphasis on mediation is about right. One should know how to mediate some, but education is more important. Education that starts at `First Principles` and builds from there is critical for thinking, for separating opinion from first principals.

Opinion can be right or wrong, and there is nothing that can separate quicker than an opinion that violates a first principal. A sound fist principal is there is nothing supernatural, for if it is, it is not supernatural. Miracles as long on the odds of happening occurrences.  If they need to violate nature to occur, then it is more likely it is bullshit than real.

Enough already.    

Monday, April 10, 2017

Really... not so much

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/159418166356/trusting-your-government-in-a-time-of-war#_=_

So you are forgetting that government does what is best for that government, not for the people. Every sucking company does the same. Look at any bank, phone, utility company, any level of government, all do what is best for them, customers, damn customers just suffer. We just had the United Airlines beating a 68 year old passenger to force him off a seat he had paid for, to get where he was going on time, because the airline had overbooked, and needed to move one of it's crews.

So what is there to trust. Trust government to abuse the people. They will abuse some.

There are too many people in this world now. The world is overpopulated. Those who are not able to haul their weight will be abused. There are many who just are not able to hold a job, not enough energy, not enough skills, not enough personality, too much honesty, not able to concentrate.

Without thieves, the insurance industry would not be able to sell thief insurance.  Oh well. Jails are to abuse the people who cannot function in our society. Rehabilitation is a concept, and like gods, it does not exist except in the mind of those who find it useful to believe.

Government can be trusted... to tax, burden and abuse the citizens. That is the role of government, and to cause the cast to flow into the pockets of the rich. The rich always get a taste.

If the US wanted to send a message and end the war, they would target Assad. Oh Golly, we hit the head civilian, so sorry, it was not intentional.

Sunday, April 9, 2017

Conrad, Conrad, you are not listening to the science

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/conrad-black-i-put-this-as-simply-as-possible-many-atheists-are-excellent-but-atheism-itself-is-hurting-the-west

How do we teach those who will not here? Conrad, the science is ahead of the curve by quite a bit. We do not have all the details yet, but we know that we have a lot of physical evidence, and we just do not yet know how it all got there yet. The thing about physical evidence is it is real, but we have not yet figured out how it got there. We have not yet figured out the modern hypothesis that explains the evidence, but we have figured out that your historical/cultural hypothesis and not the answer, and it is time to move on, based on what we know, and the modern hypothesis that explain part of the evidence. We know the last big bang happened ~13.8 X 109 years ago.

We know that evolution happened, but not yet if life started here or was seeded from elsewhere. We do know that simple non-carbon life can be started under certain conditions, but those conditions need to be maintained for those life forms to carry on. We just have not yet found the carbon based starting conditions, but then nobody is willing to pay for the study in a big and sustained way. Without the money, and the commitment over time to a adequate supply of money, we are not likely to find a new form of carbon life, and then there is the risk of a new form of virus...

So we do not need to know how before we can say the old historical/cultural hypothesis is just wrong. As soon as we start to think hypothesis, and scientific method, we begin to see illogical thought of any religion. Soon we realize we can just abandon all religions. They are just historical hypothesis.

Now we need to realize the religion is largely about control of people, by making them believe some foolishness at an early age, and also teaching them to not question. This is immoral way of trapping people into a thought system, immoral imprisonment. Of course this has been handed down, generation to generation, but some see through the system and break free. Then the unthinking try to use emotions to drive us back into the stye we escaped from, where the malignant overloads would try to pen us for eternity. We have our own powers, and can deny them control of us. So Conrad, I do not care what you think, for you believe in a sky god and are trying to control people which is immoral. You are no better than a slave owner, or slave renter.

No one has the right to force us to believe anything. Islam cannot force us, even through threat to follow there rules, or there sky god. So draw Mohamed  (.^.) ⟲ or 😆  as often as you wish.  😆Mohamed😆  They may be offended because we will not follow there laws, but that is there problem. We can respect the person but not their beliefs. Some ideologies need to be stamped out and others can be allowed to just die off. Muslims may be fine people, but there ideology is dangerous. Somewhere between 10 and 30 percent have the potential to become terrorists, or so the research shows. One out of ten, or one out of three... young men ... can become weaponized, all because they are not rational but fall prey to emotional based bullshit, rather than understanding the physical evidence. 

It is science that must lead us forward from here into a sustainable way of life.   


  

Friday, April 7, 2017

Fighting an ideology

How does one battle an ideology? It is ideology that drives humans, doing what we believe to be right, so what if the ideology is just wrong?

 http://freethinker.co.uk/2017/04/07/spanish-police-arrest-muslim-couple-for-abuse-of-daughter/

It is wrong to indoctrinate people, youths, without allowing them to evaluate the concept fully. Muslims, Islams, Christians, Jews, are all wrong. So how does one fight ideology?

David Silverman has some ideas. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95lQlsxE9K4
It will be to get in there face, and tell them they are wrong loud enough that they are willing to start to hear.

Religions are systems of hypothesis that has been superseded by reason, data, civilization, education, and knowledge. We know what is right, in the here and now, but we are still struggling to get all this information into a organized manual, for simple reference. There is just so much knowledge, and so much wrong in the ideology of the flat earth religions that we are trying to replace. It must be organized into some kind of system and documented into a logos for the lack of a better word.

Yet, once we understand the concepts, so much becomes self evident. Why has no one seen this before? Oh wait, they have, well at least parts. But no single individual has put it all together, in this time. Buddha plus the Stoics, minus a few pits, plus a bit here and there of this and that.       

Sunday, April 2, 2017

The WTF call

There are large groups of people who are being dis-advantaged by the wrong teaching by their parent.
How should we feel about this and what should be done?
Some are producing a high burden on the state. (natives)
Some are misleading others on science. (new age creationists)
Some are misleading others on environmental issues. (trump and his ilk)
Some on dealing with reality. (religion)
Some are a danger to society, and are misleading the young or reality. (Islams)

There are those who are opposed to the scientific method. There is no evidence for gods, nothing survives death, and religions are all pushed without reason. The only place left for god to hide is in the mind of the believer, and as a result religion is all just chain letter memes. Reality sucks but living in a dream state is also no way to live. It is the old " if it bothers you, just do not look." at deliberate misleading of people.  

Now does anyone have anything constructive to say about these problems we face?

So we are being mislead about food and chemicals in the foods issues. Glyphosate and the government will not even accept there is a problem. Ester 2-4-d and overeating destroying leptin receptors.

So should we get radical? or violent? or just loud?

Friday, March 24, 2017

evidence based policy making

"evidence based policy making" in M 103 is something the Canadian government is short on. Look at the Canadian good food guide. Incomplete information, not evidence based. It does not deal with those of us who do better on LCHF.

M 103 can be found at  https://www.pressreader.com/canada/national-post-latest-edition/20170131/281659664767177

Religion is based on the lack of real evidence. There is no physical evidence that there is any god. That implies that any god that could be is just in the minds of the believers where concepts exist or there is no god. That is the real logical choices, that it, that's all folks. There is no real physical god. The documented superstition of the religions can be found in the books, the Bible, Quran, Vedas, Pali Cannon, Accolades, etc. Some are better than the others as literature, some have good bits and bad bits; some that should be followed, and much that should be ignored as bad advice.

Islam will not, in the Quran form, not allow piece with others. Other lesser forms ignore parts of the historical collection of myths and instructions, and are less violent. The solution is not only elimination of Islam, but the elimination of all religion for a truth based, atheist, rational thinking, logic based behavior. We can select our good beliefs based on whatever, or go through the books and pick what we would like.

The Muslims that I have known have all been a thin skinned bunch, who get offended an anything, who would like to be treated differently than we treat each other. They get offended in the lunch room of most businesses. They want to be special. They do not fit in with the present society of Canada, and need to be separated. The government can try, but it cannot acheive separation. Many business are separating them out by not hiring them. Oh well, any businesses main objective is to make money, and needs to control costs. I have said more about this here.

Elimination of all religion and install a uniform code of human conduct is the best solution.

Saturday, March 18, 2017

Stoic half stories... Yeh, but how?

Person: it hurts when I lift my arm.
Stoic: then don't lift your arm.

https://howtobeastoic.wordpress.com/2017/03/18/stoic-advice-i-want-a-child-but-i-cant-conceive/
http://modernstoicism.com/resistance-is-futile-stoic-counsel-about-externals-by-william-ferraiolo/

The stoics and Buddhist always say to let go of your desires, attachments, delusions for all sorts of problem, but they never go on to tell anyone how to do that. That is the real problem, we never learned to let go of anything out of our minds, our will. We fail at a lot of things because we have never learned to let go of desires. There in is the "real" problem.

So how did we get those desires anyway? Well we were told that those were good desires to have, or we, as youths, decided those were good desires. These are a collection of common cultural beliefs that we assimilated, and some are just wrong. These we foisted onto us by the well meaning but wrong culture; perhaps it was not what the elders tried to teach but it was what we learned. We assent to that belief and never realized the belief was wrong, just wrong. We assented to eating more because we wanted to grow large so that the little bastards would not harass us for being small; we ate to grow larger, to be able to withstand the bully.  We ate out of defense, we ate because the numbing effect of sugar high took the edge off the pain. Overeating became epigenetically fixed. No one ever took the time to teach us to unload learned behavior, wrong behavior in favor right behavior. It is not until the bully gets the shit beat out of them that many parents even realize there is a problem. Often the wrong problem gets fixed. Do not antagonist the bully, and let the bully have his way. This is the root cause of terrorism; everyone is afraid to offend the Muslims, when the right thing is for Muslims to learn to mind there own business. But nobody ever bothers to teach unloading of wrong beliefs and reloading of the correct beliefs.

We assented to the original preposition without understanding the consequence or testing to see if it is correct. Now we know, and we can call bullshit on the wrong proposition. So until the Stoics and Buddhist start teaching unloading, they are just beating their gums.

Now I have made a few hints at the process of unloading wrong beliefs. First we need to recognize desires, aversions, delusions, as beliefs that at some time in our past we assented to, and as such tuck these into our automatic decision making matrix. Next we need to recognize these as wrong, and this may also confirm the source. We need to become willing to let go of this belief, even if it was religion or parental based. Often identifying it as wrong is helpful. We may need to load a new correct belief in it's place. Eat only the correct amount, just enough to where you can stop eating. Or that desire was our parents, not ours. We are in control of our desires because we assent to them in the first place, and that makes us responsible.

Religions likes to load the gun for there own growth. Rational thought and behavior should trump all religions and belief systems, except when the belief system is rational and complete.  If we apply the legal standard laws of evidence, there is no god.

Some things are up to us and some are not. The main part of what is up to us is our assent to propositions. We are responsible for what propositions we accept, even wrong ones. When we realize they are wrong, we should unload these promptly, and load the correct ones. 

Thursday, March 16, 2017

Questions

http://godlessmom.com/4-questions-brand-new-atheist/

1) Why is there something rather than nothing? (or) Why does the universe bother to exist? (or) Why is it necessary for our universe to exist, and to continue to exist?

All this got me thinking. First let me say that because the mind can create a question object in the mind does not mean it is a real or meaningful question. That is not to say anything against the mind, but if the mind can conceive a god, and no god, it can also conceive of other thing that just are not real.

First, if there was nothing, there would just be empty cold space, aka nothing. Why should there be a bound on nothing? What else would nothing look like?

Before the big bang, what ever was there had higher entropy than matter that existed.  Disorder increases. If it was a singularity, what ever that was, is now gone, converted into matter and energy. If it was not a "singularity" then it could be something like a massive black hole exploding, and we only see the effect of the last one. Some questions we can not yet answer yet. It need nothing have anything to do with we humans. It is a human desire to have an answer. All most all cultures have a creation hypothesis story. We want answers, but some questions are beyond our understanding yet.

Chemical and physical process do not need a purpose, they continue until conditions are not suitable. end of. We humans try to place propose on things where there is none. This is something like our desire to learn and/or understand. Man has no purpose beyond to reproduce, unless we impose one onto it. We should be trying to keep our environment in such a condition that we can live, but there is not enough cooperation to see the obvious. There is religion because people will not see the obvious. Oh well. enough.

Concepts like purpose are just concepts, and as such exist as concepts. Our mind can handle them as abstract nouns, concepts, yet they may have no physical reality. Things happen because of a driving force exists, nothing more. Man is just a opportunistic minimal living on a big rock whirling through space. It has enough gravity to attract an atmosphere, and enough heat for organic material to produce oxygen that we breath. We need to keep the carbon dioxide consuming plants healthy so that we may continue to live. We live in a closed system, and our population has become large enough that we are effecting our environment. Shit happens.     

Wednesday, March 15, 2017

Why should I care if the truth offens you?

Cultural stories of creation are myths. So is the bible and the Quran. There is no real god, at best gods are just concepts or belief held by others. Any god is just a mental object. Why should I care if you find this offensive for this is the truth, the one and only truth, and if you find it offensive, that is your problem.

I have religion pushed at me frequently, and I push back now. It is only right.

I find political correctness offensive. You are trying to force your beliefs onto me, even when your beliefs are wrong. Do not expect compliance with political correctness.

Species is often defined as groups which do not naturally interbreed through location, preference, or habit. We humans are, by that definition, a group of species. As such, how can any government expect that different species will live together when the immigrants will not respect our traditions. Every time a immigrant with difficulty speaking English cuts a the line up at Tim Hortons, there are developing ill will. Every time they do something stupid in traffic, there is more ill will. In Red Neck Alberta, expect some immigrant to be shot soon. It is easier than lynching. Those who do not comply with the law get away with much already, "I did not know" goes the cry. Bull shit. I saw the same one get chewed out, and she did cut the like again the next day.

There is no self, or nonself in Buddha terms is true, correct, and real even if we belief in the illusion of there being a self. Our mind is just a mass of neurons with synapse. The self is, at best an image of self created by a bunch of neurons and synapse doing there thing. The whole brain and body is the self, but there is no self within the brain, just a convenient illusion, and a self created ego with "privileges" that expands with power and success, however we define power and success.

Muslims are impossible to not offend if we chose to try to talk to them, so I do not care. So when asked anything religions, I will tell them there is no god, so you can do as you like. End of.    

Thursday, March 9, 2017

Historical Cultural Creation Hypothesis

Historical Cultural Creation Hypothesis

As the old Navajo, in DNA Tracing, said, "calling our creation stories 'myths' is offencive."  So how should we modern thinking humans refer to these cultural and religious myths so as to call them what they are and remain politically correct, and correct in reality. In reality, these are myths, but to have something blow over the head of the uneducated, to remain unoffensive, while remaining truthful to our own beliefs?

There is a new age Hindu fellow, trained in science, and acceptance science, who is trying to adapt Hinduism to modern reality and English. Hinduism has the same problem as most of the religions, with the youth forsaking the belief system; and he sees the solution is to modernize the religion, keep the values and the good parts, at the same time as adopting science that we see as real. Buddhism rubbed off Hinduism, just as all christian branches rubbed of Catholics. Keep the best of both, let the wrong, useless, oversimplified, and waste of time stuff fall off, perhaps even create a new profit or leader. (Joseph Smith, or LR Hubbard type hype leader come to mind, but based on truth.) We do have the three of the four horseman, but these have not figured out the individual non-exceptional human needs yet. But it is the why of routine liturgy that must be explored. The Buddhist spins the wheel to the right as a symbol of "tomorrow is another day to do it all again" and to remind ourselves of karma, (aka, we are the sum of our past), and we have a small effect on the future, and to the right because, facing south, that is the way the sun goes.  

Many of us spend our lives believing or studying a hypothesis, only to find that the hypothesis is false. Now what? Oh well, much good came incidentally out of the effort. Does it matter. Out of the 110 or 120 billion people who lived before us, how much has been lost? A human life is but one test of a biological package, the test is survival of genes, not knowledge or correctness. So if we are to measure our lives by the number of offspring, we have far different values than other measuring by other accomplishment. It does not matter, we are only one of the 110-120 billion other experiments in H. sapiens lives. We each struggle to expand our understanding is specific ways. Comparison is not justified. We should do for others as we would they do for us. We should do for others, not to others, to get our of our heads. It was easier to see this when there was less change, but it still can be seen in multi-generational communities, if we look.

All cultures have there historical cultural creation hypothesis; Science has a new one, which is supported by evidence, some physical, some logical. The old one will need to be abandoned. We need to pay attention now to science, not because of what we know, but for the approaching issues that we have identified on the horizon, and others that are there as well. Yet if we look at the why's of many practices, at there foundation lie a sound ethical reason. Perhaps I need to breath a bit more first.

The words are but a crude pointer to the though behind the concept. The incense create a smoke for the concepts, thoughts, ideas, the abstract nouns, to ride on....    





Monday, March 6, 2017

Control vs Free Will

Philosophy, by simply changing the name, can start the argument over again. How different is free will and what is within our control? Epictetus to Dan Dennett to Sam Harris. How different is that which each define? Well Sam tries to measure it, but what he measures is part body, beyond our control or power, so he finds we little or no free will.

Epictetus starts by defining what we have complete control of, our mind from input acceptance decision to output decision, bounded by our beliefs, values, and reality. Reality includes our talent and skill stack, our temperament.  Our assents, positive and negative impulse, opinion, reason or logic, are all that is ours. We can, also, over time change our beliefs, likes and dislikes, some rationally, but one our beliefs become fixed, change takes time. Also what is marginally out of our power, hidden behind beliefs, likes and dislikes, will vary, person to person. It is those individual differences that make up the diverse population with different behaviors we see today.

We are bounded by reality on one side, and each persons reality is different. Some of us do not tolerate cold, others of us do not tolerate heat. Each persons skill stack is different, as unique as a fingerprint. Yet each of us has control of our thinking, our ability to accept or reject an incoming proposition, as long as that preposition does not conflict with our beliefs. If it conflicts with their beliefs, then it conflicts with their learned beliefs, for all beliefs are just learned, which often people have never rationally examined.

Some of what we learned is just wrong. We do not know what part or which "fact". We just do not know. Which or what. Some facts do not stand the logic test, other the total lack of evidence makes it unlikely, even inconceivable to some. So one wall of our free will or control is movable by adding or subtracting beliefs. This may be why AA and the like work, they change our beliefs and place behaviors out of our control. Oh well, who knows.

Free will, or within our power or control, is what personal responsibility is based on. So if instinct is to eat, we are not responsible for overeating; if what we eat is within our free will, our overeating is within our responsibility. Likely, is in that zone of partial control, where our free will permits the body to have input. We can use our power of impulse to move ourselves into a food free environment, but others may contaminate our environment or we wait too long, instinct takes over, and we lose control. Staying out of places where we lose control may be the best control some of us have if instinct is in overdrive.      

Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Parasites of the Mind

Parasites of the Mind

I do not know what else to call them. These are concepts, residing totally within the mind that are wrong, and create problems for the person who's mind is infected... or perhaps not for the person, but those around him... or perhaps not causing them or anyone a problem, but are just obviously wrong, and that person does not know it, or perhaps he does.

I have one that says eat, eat. I know it is there, but how does one get rid of it? Identification must be the first step. I have dispatched some of these parasites that were culturally implanted. Several remain, including TV, eating, and personality disorders. Oh well. I have given up any concept of religion, and am trying to sort my beliefs out to that which is logical, or at least logical or needed for a modernish sort of life. I am not willing to go minimalist, for I was raised that way, with nothing but what was needed, as defined by others. I often feel like I was raised as a farm slave. Oh well, it is all done now.

Religion is the worst parasite of the mind. God lives only as a false concept in the mind. As a concept, it is beyond space and time, and has no physical existence, yet directs the lives of people, as long as they have the concept in their mind, and strongly controls their mind, just like that eat, eat, parasite of the mind. Each morning I wake up, and there it is, that damn eat, eat thought.

So will the next piece of evolution provide a truth test, is this though based on reality or is it a free floating concept that macerates as being real? Yet the eat eat is at least part real. Is it thinking that causes the problem?

If one cannot separate religion from there life, than perhaps they cannot separate truth and false thoughts. So then we cannot trust our political leaders to tell the truth, to base decisions on the important truths, and simpler issues.We see people who are clear of religion, and we see those who are not clear of religion. So which group functions better? Which have higher morals, ethics, values? Well as it turns out morals, ethics, and values are totally independent of a belief in a god or religion. Many religions promote a set of morals, ethics and values, yet these are not attached to a belief in a god.

Any religion that condones war, in any form, permits sanctioned killing, while there religion says do not kill. So right off there is a cognitive dissonance. Either address the dissonance, or you will lose the cognitive alert. Preach religion and armament is just not compatible; it is either one or the other. Guns bring violence, so the religions preach one thing and live another. Then either arm and defend free of any god, or have your god with peace and losses. The alternative is open sanctioned killing as with Islam, which is also a mind parasite.

It is only awareness that is the first step in removal of mind parasites. Oh well, in the end we will just die anyway.      




.     

Sunday, February 26, 2017

Offensive... your problem.

We who have been raised in a primarily christian, agonist, atheistic society have a different concept of offensive than that of a muslim or arabic majority culture. To be offended, we need to take offense by learning to be offended at bullfeathers, or not have confidence in our own beliefs. The muslims have been taught to take offense at "pictures of mohamed", it is a learned reaction to disrespecting a bullfeathers quzi historical, fiction or mythical character. Belief in a fictional mythical character or the laws of such is a now a joke, hence, anyone who believes a fiction cannot be taken seriously.  It is impossible to take seriously any belief system that is just wrong. We can see now these are just juvenile meme systems.  Live this way and good will come, and if you do not, hell will come to you.

So once we see all religion as just meme systems, how can we take them seriously? Why would we ever be offended at a religions wild ideas unless we are in a religion, and trying to be living with ludicrous beliefs, aka, a big man in the sky concept.

Now should we have the right to offend them? That is there reaction to something that is acceptable in much of our society. So do we have a responsibility to clean our behavior of things that they find objectionable. It that is yes, then they also have the responsible to clean their behavior of things we find objectionable. This makes coexistence logically impossible, unless everyone learns to not be offended. How does one learn to not be offended at the pushing of bullshit onto the youth and others?

If we have confidence, we can separate out others crap beliefs out, and make a decision to ignore, avoid hearing, preach realism back, or let it all go as just their delusions or their beliefs. If you are offended, it is your problem.    



    

Thursday, February 23, 2017

Current Beleifs

Current Beliefs, they are a changing, to what is more likely true. This human uses a probability approach to what is likely true, not an absolute or traditional belief approach. Decisions mostly require some kind of "future knowledge" to determine if they are correct. Most likely positive outcome, conservative, lest regret, most probable chance of success, or some combination can be used as well or there opposites. A decision is a direction, not a future outcome. We do not have control of future outcome; anyone who thinks we do is inflicted with a mind parasite. 

There is no god, no soul, no life after death, no rebirth, no reincarnation. Only natural can occur; there is no supernatural nor miracles, now or in the past. Story telling was likely one of the first language art forms. Language produced a multitude of creation, old times, and historical behavior stories. We need to do what is rational and logical for any and all of the human species to survive in this current time frame.

Species is often defined as the largest group that would naturally mate and produce fertile offspring. This can be psychological as well as range. The key word is "naturally"...mate. A sex deprived male will mate with almost anything, and that is not natural; the other common definition excludes "natural". Natural only mating provides the possibility that we h. Sapiens are composed of numerous species, and therefore I may not be of the same species as other individuals, this could include the group who consider mating with there own sex, and similar groups. This provides me with detachment from all perverted behavior groups, aka different preference groups, of h. Sapiens. This can be psychological or range. These other species have the right to live out their lives in peace, as long as they do not interfere with society. 

There is no self, only neurons in the brain that produce an illusion of self. That has been learned in the collective environments that I have physically passed through. These eukaryotic cells will just die off in the end, and with them goes all traces of non physical self or our outputs.   

We have free will over those thing that are rational and in our control, as Epictetus describes, but only influence over our body and anything that is instinctual. As emotions are based on instinct and beliefs, we have only partial control over emotions and instinctive behaviors. As children we can learn to modify our instinct drives better, to fit into the society we live in, and comply with social norms, even when the social norms are wrong. But only with great difficulty do we learn at age, but we can learn. What we learned as children is not consciously known or recognized, to us as adults, as learned behavior.

Grammar is convention, and different parts of culture have different styles and conventions, which is also limited by the memory and concern of the individual. No religious person has any right to talk about my grammar as they are unable to sort fact and fiction. I do spell poorly, have poor memory for spelling and words, am dyslectic, and do not care about conventional grammar as no one has been able to explain it to me so that I understood it rationally. My family of origin had no idea what good grammar was, and I missed that in school for the most part. 

We have an instinct to learn as learning is one of the human skills. As we learn, we see the need to understand other things, yet there is not enough time to do all that is needed. After adopting all these beliefs, language itself, needs to change, but how does one do that. All the belief based references needs to be removed, and only facts included.

Memes and meme systems are the basic building block of though, speech a communications. Tools, as Dennett says. Religions are mind parasites that control the recognition of reality of those inflicted with the parasite. Those mind parasites that do not permit peaceful coexistence should be inoculated against, or disinfected and that may destroy all mind parasites. Good.  



Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Sorting out reality

What is reality, correct action and consciousness? Does consciousness even exist?

According to Dan Dennett, we have a predictive loop in our mind, and it conducts "data transfer." The conformation only comes back if negative if and only if a negative is encountered. Negative only confirmation signaling.  This makes the sending control greater but somewhat reliant on the transducer/ signal conditioner. We cannot correct for a zero signal return, as addressing a non existent identity. There is no god, there is no soul, and there is no self, but only an illusion. Wow. This puts the human mind at a disadvantage until we realize this. On someone can install a false concept in our mind, and until we test it, we take it for real. This is dangerous reality. We may need to quarantine unproveable ideas and concepts by saying to ourselves: Joe believes ...X....Y....

Once we realize that unless we get a negative signal, we can accept a non signal as a positive signal or no signal. We are free to go in outward or forward into the gaps between our knowledge and not encounter real physical resistance. Generating anything that is either non existent or confirms to our prediction from assumed facts, even when it is not. When we are thinking about the concept world, we are free to exploit this weakness in the human mind operating weakness or is it a feature that drives us forward without restraint. We live in a boundless world, unless we provide an internal, self imposed or collective society imposed bound. We need also to test it for reality, not just conceptual. 

Our mind is composed of hedonistic synapses and selfish neurons. That does not leave room for anything like a self, only room for an illusion/delusion of a self. Self is simply a way of thinking, and a collective delusion that we have learned, as children, and have never taken the time to seriously examine. We are all just opportunistic organic matter, living on a big whirling rock, and there is only a convenient illusion of self.

As the rock whirls, we have awareness of our selves, our thoughts, and our actions. We have complete control or confinement of our thoughts, but not of our bodies; that is the dichotomy of control. People like Sam Harris who say we have no free will, aka no self control have included some of what we do not have control of, within their measurement. We have control of our mind's output, but not what is thrust into our minds. We can pick up mind parasites and/or pathogens that drive us, just as a fluke drives an ant to destruction to complete the life cycle of the fluke. Religion is a parasite, imposed on us by others as a community delusion. It makes humans easy to control.

Buddha, in his meditations, realized there is no self, but never explained what he really meant. He likely did not have a better description. This no self is quite possible to see in meditation, once we realize what we are looking at. But is that reality? It certinally is the space between concepts, but is there anything further beyond. Self was certinally one of the concepts loaded into the necktop by community delusions, that can also be removed.

We have free will and responsibility for our actions, and that is enough to go forward with. I live with an alien species, that I am sure of.

Friday, February 10, 2017

What is after Atheism?

 Having stepped from being raised within the "Anglican Church", and rebelled into agnostic thinking, becoming somewhat educated, becoming atheistic, I need to ask what is next, or as the some says, Is that all there is?  Searching about the internet, I came across:

https://www.bcbsdharma.org/article/a-philosophical-assessment-of-secular-buddhism/

which, in a way, addresses this same question but from the view of Buddhism. So does the term "post theism" really apply to my belief system? What I believe has been assembled a piece at a time, from where I was raised, what I did and saw, heard, witnessed. Some wore me down, and oppressed me. Some was freeing. We now see the likes of Trump providing alternative facts, false news, providing a alternative reality as presented by the media. Just do not look at the parts we do not like.

There is little doubt that for an individual, going to theism from atheism is not a common occurrence, but playing the role, a "closeted atheist" could have the advantages of both a religious community and truth. But anyone believing the truth today, or science of today would suffer cognitive dissonance to believe both science and religion, if they were detail orientated, and rigid in their thinking. So what come after no god, no afterlife?

Immigration or redistribution within the political identity has taken care of environment population saturation to this point in time, but there is little space remaining in this world. Carbon dioxide levels indicate that we are over the earth atmosphere carrying capacity.  CPAP machines indicate we are at the limit of carbon dioxide concentration for unassisted human population. So are we going to stop reproducing or are we going to keep going until our environment starts to kill off people, to control the population? If we keep going, are we going to be able to let people die? Or are we going to destroy ourselves keeping sick people alive to where it is a bankrupting activity? It is not going to be a shortage of water or food that takes us out, but adequately clean air which is a world resource. It will kill the old first, which will not stop reproduction. 

We have " turnip patches" where the governments house "human animals", the ungifted and physically incomplete people for there natural lives. We have such high disease rates, and healthcare costs in Canada. As the carbon dioxide level rises, we will have more of these, so the cost will increase until this become such an economic draw that it will bankrupt the government. Canada is at the point of hurting from this; the US lets more people who cannot afford to keep themselves alive to die off. Oh well.

It is my prediction that there will be much screaming and gnashing of teeth before the population stabilizes at a healthy value. My estimate is 3.5 billion; the population when carbon dioxide was last nearly stable at.

So the ultimate question is what should I spend the remainder of my life doing? Carbon sequestering is the obvious answer, but that is so highly taxed, and so little revenue off the practices. And nobody cares much about it yet. Carbon sequestering is against government policies, as they depend on revenue that depletes good farm land with housing. Oh well, in the end we just die anyway.   

         

Tuesday, February 7, 2017

Confidence Source.

Our beliefs lead to confidence. When we can say, without out any doubt, that "What I believe is correct without any doubt", how can we not have confidence. This is why religious and political leaders can do stupid things, but have confidence that what they are doing is correct.  Yes, this is founded on circular logic. But even the scientific method is circular logic, but a five step circular logic.

The thing with small circle circular logic is that it always appears correct, even when it is not. What is one to do? any religion thereby appears correct. There is a god because I believe there is one. I believe there is no god because there is no place other among the concept class of objects for a god to hide. The concept class has no physical existence, and exist only in the mind of the believer. Existence is not a proper attribute of the concept class. End of discus ion. What more can be said. If no god, no after life, no soul, no moral imperatives beyond what we must do to all live in a community, for we cannot know or do enough to live well. We could live simply, but not advance very far as individuals. Oh well, in the end we all just die anyway.

To advance, man must live in communities where division of labor can occur. Yet in communities there is so much bullsh*t and waste. As communities grow beyond a point, there must be declining returns. Wasted time searching for customers, searching for products, and along comes the internet with mostly false information. Look at the US political system. Look at all the religious wasters, and we atheist escaping the influences of the religious wasters. It is a difficult struggle, and we must live among the religious wasters, for they are not going to change. We can only save the young from such delusions. The old are not worth the effort, unless they want it. Oh well...

So where is the effort best placed? In the young before there minds become fixed, in any age that are questioning, and looking for truth or just change. Or we can just broadcast to whoever and not worry about anything more. Once we have cast out religion, then what? That is where the ongoing struggle that is life occurs. That is where we humans get sorted out. That is where our found confidence in knowing what is right provides value to those who want it. 

Sunday, January 29, 2017

The two sides of Codependency

"The codependent feels the need to solve another’s problems. The codependent believes that help is needed and that the person in need cannot manage to make the right decisions or take the right actions to solve his or her own problems. Without the codependent’s input, disaster for the other person is assured."

https://www.recoveryconnection.com/top-ten-indicators-suffer-codependency/

This is the feeling that 'I have the solution to your expressed problem in my pocket'. and you do not want the solution, you only want to whine.

So is the solution, when I see someone struggling with something simple, should I try to teach a simple solution, or just shrug my shoulders and walk away? That is what the definition and recovery connection seems to suggest. Is that how the ideal person should act? So I am free to not explain the details, I am free, I am free!!!

But the other definition: excessive emotional or psychological reliance on a partner, typically a partner who requires support due to an illness or addiction. --- All I was trying to do was help an inept person through a tough problem and I am the bad guy. Screw it, you are on your own.

But what about all those who depend on the kindness of strangers? those who are truly dependent? And those who have been blinded with religion, or the lack of education, or resistance to education? Too bad, to "help" would feed my co-dependence.

Also not that there are those people who can never be happy regardless of there situation. What do we do if we find ourselves working and/or living with them? 

 Religions are a dependency on a god concept. It is a belief in the concept is going to "save" you. Well good for you. But that is not reality, there is no god, no salvation, and nothing to be saved from. Death comes to all of us, delaying is the best we can do. Look into the abyss of reality and accept our fate.


Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Partial Solutions

Back when I was a pup, I took several (understatement) courses in partial differential equations as part of an engineering program. For those who do not recall, differentials are the slope of the line, section, or plane orthogonal to one axis. Partials differential have three or more axis, hence have two or more slopes parallel to axis. This can be visualized in 3D space, but beyond that, we just do the maths, or in with thermodynamic surfaces, all other parameters are just held fixed, and the relationship is studied. We do similar with soils, but some of the changes are variable to just unknown. What fun. Oh will, I am retired now. 

We humans have similar with emotions, beliefs, values, knowledge, desires, moods, temperament, motivations, behaviors, all of which varies over time.

Our emotions are neither good nor bad, as long as we identify them, accept them, evaluate them rationally before acting or not. Much of the time there is no rational response, so we can accept our emotions, do something or not. Often there is no escape of the situation when we are children, and often as adults, the most rational response is to stay the course, even when it is far less than ideal. Most situations are just beyond our control, even beyond human control. Many are the result of masses of humans, each independently making their own decisions, and we need to survive in the resulting chaos. It is beyond our control, rushed, pressured, and the result of human driven chaos. Many of us cannot deal with the speed and volume of modern life. Oh well, in the end we just die anyway.

Beliefs and values create a man made hell for some us. We are in control of our own beliefs, and one deadly flaw of the human mind is attachment to our beliefs. This becomes apparent when we realize that our previous beliefs were wrong. We need to treat our beliefs as we do science, and ratchet to better and better. Yet there is a great resistance to this, even institutions (religions) who's purpose is to resist and promote wrong concepts. Until we realize this, we are just being manipulated by the dead. Fear of the unknown is being used against us, and effort is made to keep us in ignorance of these fairly simple but likely true concepts.

There is no supernatural, just luck and forces of nature. We can modify some through time and effort, but our effort may be wasted, or may yield prophets and/or profits. Who can know?

Emotions, moods, and temperament overlie our genetic predisposition, and are a matter of time scale and consistence. These can be modified by our beliefs and/or chemicals. Even spices can cause sleeping hallucination. Knowledge is just learned from those who went before, and each new generation needs to test them out to be sure if they apply to them, and for truth.

Desires set our direction in life, and motivations drive us. Behavior is what happens of the possible range that can occur in our environment. We can only do what is available within the range of possible activities, given all the external and internal constraints and motivations, within the skills, knowledge, motivations and drives of the individual. The outcomes are left largely at the individual's chance. Oh well, in the end we all just die anyway.

So we put together a life, moving a bit or a lot one way and then a bit or a lot the other direction. Sometime we over correct, sometimes a bit short. We move through life, events occur, and if we take enough time to examine, we find it is all just adjustment, sometime the system adjusts to us, sometimes we adjust to the system, and some times we just break apart or fail. Life will go on until it does not.               

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.