TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Cant figure out why we hate the middle east...
Pages (8): « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 »

Re: Re: Re: Re: Cant figure out why we hate the middle east...

quote:

Originally posted by Gauss Isn't it obvious? If it isn't, then we have nothing to discuss about. Well, there isn't anything to discuss one way or another. You're generalising whole nation based on acts of several individuals.

No No...you didnt answer the question. I didnt ask what I was doing, I asked which generalization I stated (you have to be explicit here) that you disagree with.

I think the issue is you perceived a generalization and then projected it onto me. Because I made no statement as such in my original post.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN the difference being that none of these horrors were committed "for" atheism.

So if I find a quote from Stalin or Mao that says they are doing this to create a Godless state where man can triumph what will happen to your argument?

quote:

Originally posted by Jocker ok. but tell your friend to tell them that flying jets into buildings is bad, mmkay?

i am sure if the west never stepped into the middle east, they wouldn't have crashed airplanes into the world trade center. think about why they did it in the first place (sure its because they are crazy, but also because of what the US is doing and what they are supporting).

quote:

Originally posted by hadi ****** i am sure if the west never stepped into the middle east, they wouldn't have crashed airplanes into the world trade center. think about why they did it in the first place (sure its because they are crazy, but also because of what the US is doing and what they are supporting).

Foreseeable consequences are foreseen only so far in advance.

In court there is the "but for" clause. But for that, this would never have happened.

However true that may be you have to find a way to make a reasonable man believe that that is the primary factor.

Otherwise you could say that if the universe never existed, we wouldnt have this platform for pain and hurt and sorrow...so its the universes fault.

You have to find proximal but for clause otherwise its just kind of a "...yeah thats true...i guess...?"

yikes

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax I didnt ask if google worked I wanted your research links. You can simplify it in the future without the BS. I also fail to see how religion is any more at fault than naturalism when you realize youre dead in 60 years why not take whatever you can get from everyone you can? Its a pretty wild claim to make that if we got rid of religion everyones pupils would shrink and their lives would come into focus and everyone would just pull out the rake and start gardening.

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T q. why would most people remain moral in an entirely not religious society? a. aside from legislated morality (fear of going to jail/etc), people who know this life is all they have - that there is no afterlife at least from their own prespective will want to live on in some way: in memory, they will behave in particular ways in order to be remembered in particular ways. they will do moral things to be remembered as moral persons, they will do amoral things to be remembered as amoral persons. that (likely subconscious) consideration would guide them and 'keep them in check' as it already does now, except that now, that consideration only takes a prominent role late in a person's life. i'd venture to say it takes prominance even over religious beliefs, exactly because it is usually subconscious.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles "Purity" is the ideal you see popping up again and again in awful, murderous societies. "Racial purity" in Hitler's Germany. "Ideological purity" in Stalinism and Maoism. "Moral purity" in Catholic Europe of the Middle Ages and paternalistic Muslim regimes. This is no accident. The way to achieve these kinds of "purity" is through intolerance of differences -- differences in physiology, differences in political beliefs, differences in sexual practices -- which is what ultimately leads to all the horrors you read about. It seems that, for whatever reason, some people simply cannot live with the fact that other people look, act, and believe differently than they do.

I agree with all of this, and would only add that conflict is caused by the thrusting of promotion of one lifestyle/ideal as somehow "better" than any other lifestyle, practice, or belief structure. In cases where lifestyles or practice cannot be changed, individuals are simply swept aside, as was certainly the case in Nazi Germany.

This can be the case with religion, language, colonial practice, or even government. Certainly violence in the Middle East is at least partially a backlash against the perceived imposition of democracy as superior to previous political practices.

its interesting. the 2 real major problems with the middle east, or more specifically, muslim/islam governed countries comes down to education and fanaticism. those societies (a lot having to do with the oppression of women) are very intolerant to individualism. they arent able to accept that everyone has their own views mostly because they are blinded by their religious fanaticism. islam is a very tolerant religion in its original form, but this wahidi islam is the fanatical anti-western form of islam, aka islamism, is what is gaining steam very quickly in the middle east.

there was a thing on tv about 6-7 months ago, it was on the discovery channel, and it probed specifically where and when the fanaticism came into play. i dont remember what it was called but it was very good. i wish it was more in depth but considering it was only a 1hr segment it was very good imho.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax So if I find a quote from Stalin or Mao that says they are doing this to create a Godless state where man can triumph what will happen to your argument?

Ayn Rand is the biggest atheist I can think of, and she was certainly no communist.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Ayn Rand is the biggest atheist I can think of, and she was certainly no communist.

lol why did you tell me that? I never said Atheism = communism

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T

Yes, but saying that someone wants to have people remember them fondly doesnt make sense to the naturalist. Its just a bunch of neurons firing randomly that happens to be interpreted by you as something called a wish about some abstract chemical net you have in your brain that you associate with memory.

Its not a reason in the epistemological sense...its equally as valid as religion as a method of morality as far as youre putting it.

I was saying the naturalist almost views life fatalistically in the sense we have no way to respond to our stimuli and brain patters other than the way we do. It was set in motion, we are along for the ride, why worry about it?

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Cant figure out why we hate the middle east...

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax No No...you didnt answer the question. I didnt ask what I was doing, I asked which generalization I stated (you have to be explicit here) that you disagree with. I think the issue is you perceived a generalization and then projected it onto me. Because I made no statement as such in my original post.

Which generalisation? This one:

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax Cant figure out why we hate the middle east... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6557679.stm oh wait...shit like that.

So, basically, you're saying that "we" hate the middle east (millions of people that have nothing to do with the article) because a few muderers got away with their crime.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Cant figure out why we hate the middle east...

quote:

Originally posted by Gauss Which generalisation? This one: So, basically, you're saying that "we" hate the middle east (millions of people that have nothing to do with the article) because a few muderers got away with their crime.

Actually I used an example to demonstrate widespread corruption at the highest levels of the judiciary. This isnt the first time nor the last this stuff has happened at the supreme court level.

This widespread system of injustice is among the chief complaints raised against the region.

You have to read the whole sentence I typed because words such as "like" change the meaning. I know language can be tough sometimes but lets not jump at every missed nuance.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax Yes, but saying that someone wants to have people remember them fondly doesnt make sense to the naturalist. Its just a bunch of neurons firing randomly that happens to be interpreted by you as something called a wish about some abstract chemical net you have in your brain that you associate with memory. Its not a reason in the epistemological sense...its equally as valid as religion as a method of morality as far as youre putting it. I was saying the naturalist almost views life fatalistically in the sense we have no way to respond to our stimuli and brain patters other than the way we do. It was set in motion, we are along for the ride, why worry about it?

because we have control over our actions, or at the very least, an illusion of control - even the naturalists amongst us!

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax Yes, but saying that someone wants to have people remember them fondly doesnt make sense to the naturalist. Its just a bunch of neurons firing randomly that happens to be interpreted by you as something called a wish about some abstract chemical net you have in your brain that you associate with memory. Its not a reason in the epistemological sense...its equally as valid as religion as a method of morality as far as youre putting it. I was saying the naturalist almost views life fatalistically in the sense we have no way to respond to our stimuli and brain patters other than the way we do. It was set in motion, we are along for the ride, why worry about it?

That's a pretty extreme interpretation of the advances made in biopsychology. I disagree that people involved in this area are deterministic; if anything they emphasis the non-deterministic nature of things because most psychological processes are a blend of social pressures and natural predispositions. Just because we are coming to understand that most brain activity is boiled down to chemical and electrical exchanges doesn't mean that the result of those exchanges aren't extremely rich and complex. There are still many things to be understood about brain development and activity and each step gets us closer to understanding, even if it is just understanding what is not happening.

I don't agree that acknowledging that our brain doesn't have some sort of mystical matter infused in it and that consciousness is derived from such basic reactions leads to complete chaos. Our consciousness is what drives us, and our understanding that things don't have to be the way they are is what prevents us from just being meandering beasts.

I dunno...if you take in social pressures (which are based of of previous social pressure ad infinitum) and mix them with the wiring of a brain, isnt it a guaranteed outcome? The only thing missing in the equation are what all of the variables are. Once you took every variable and understood it dont you think youd eventually be able to say "Person will do X". What disposes you to think that humans have any control whatsoever over what they are going to do. Genes have the instruction, the DNA carries it out...the world provides the stimuli.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax I dunno...if you take in social pressures (which are based of of previous social pressure ad infinitum) and mix them with the wiring of a brain, isnt it a guaranteed outcome? The only thing missing in the equation are what all of the variables are. Once you took every variable and understood it dont you think youd eventually be able to say "Person will do X". What disposes you to think that humans have any control whatsoever over what they are going to do. Genes have the instruction, the DNA carries it out...the world provides the stimuli.

Hehe you're thinking like an economist. The thing is not all variables can be cuantified and not all players are rational, i.e. people dont always do what they're supposed to do to maximize the benefit of an outcome. All behaviors have more than one outcome depending on a plethora of interactions going on. Only in theory could you measure all variables. And each person would be different. That's the beauty of the brain, experiences shapes and molds everything in your behavior, interplaying with your predispositions. It would be so hard to take everything into account, but in theory it would be possible. There is some control. You can stop things, you can change your attitudes, you can move around. Granted, not with everything, but with most. There is a bit of determinism but it's bound to happen with any system. It happens to a degree with religion too. I wouldn't say that it is necessary deterministic though.

EDIT: Even if slightly deterministic the system is so dynamic (i.e. everything depends on so many variables and is so interlinked) that one change somewhere can create a ripple effect and everything would need to be remeasured again. And the problem is that even measuring causes changes. It's a bit mind boggling

youre assuming people have the ability to override their genes instruction though.

i.e. if we knew what all the genes instructions were it wouldnt be about "persons" it would be figuring out the manual for each human. Then wed have our variables.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax I dunno...if you take in social pressures (which are based of of previous social pressure ad infinitum) and mix them with the wiring of a brain, isnt it a guaranteed outcome? The only thing missing in the equation are what all of the variables are. Once you took every variable and understood it dont you think youd eventually be able to say "Person will do X". What disposes you to think that humans have any control whatsoever over what they are going to do. Genes have the instruction, the DNA carries it out...the world provides the stimuli.

the fact that i can choose what actions to take at which points at which ways gives me a sense of control, whether it is illusory or not is irrelevant unless you can demonstrate a difference between the real and the illusory.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax youre assuming people have the ability to override their genes instruction though.

As I said, most of them, not all. Some determine the broad outline of things, and may not be changed, but the details can be changed. If it were a purely deterministic system you could not change anything. You can be greatly inclined to being gay by your genes, but how you live your life and how you deal with your inclinations and it's interaction with social life is controlled by you. Obviously you can't control everything in your life, but that doesnt mean you don't have enough flexibility to live your life how you want.

Edit: The thing is it's not genes alone man. Behavior has been shown to even shape your brain differently. So behavior does affect the genetic component in your body. Even if you decoded all the genes, you still wouldn't be able to figure out the behaviors because of the massive amounts of other variables.

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T the fact that i can choose what actions to take at which points at which ways gives me a sense of control, whether it is illusory or not is irrelevant unless you can demonstrate a difference between the real and the illusory.

If you have taken philosophy classes youd realize the answer is "We cant tell so we have to assume reality is real"

quote:

Originally posted by venomX As I said, most of them, not all. Some determine the broad outline of things, and may not be changed, but the details can be changed. If it were a purely deterministic system you could not change anything. You can be greatly inclined to being gay by your genes, but how you live your life and how you deal with your inclinations and it's interaction with social life is controlled by you. Obviously you can't control everything in your life, but that doesnt mean you don't have enough flexibility to live your life how you want.

Well if there is a threshold reading for homosexuality then im sure theres a point of no return. The body isnt all 0 and 1 but Im saying why cant it just be we dont have the understanding of biology to realize why its all deterministic? Why isnt this conversation we are having guaranteed by what has happened previously.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax youre assuming people have the ability to override their genes instruction though. i.e. if we knew what all the genes instructions were it wouldnt be about "persons" it would be figuring out the manual for each human. Then wed have our variables.

please provide an example of a theoretical genetic instruction of the kind you speak of.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax If you have taken philosophy classes youd realize the answer is "We cant tell so we have to assume reality is real"

erm, i did, that was rhetorical

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax lol why did you tell me that? I never said Atheism = communism

Only because you used two communists as examples for atheists killing people. Ayn Rand was an atheist, but not a communist, and did not advocate genocide. So perhaps the correlation is with communism and not with atheism. That's what I meant to say at least.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.