Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Indoctrination


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Indoctrination Page: <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Indoctrination - 11/18/2012 5:12:02 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Good point.


Thank you.

The balloon exercise was, by the way, a serious suggestion, meant to be helpful, not an attempt at being condescending or anything like that. I've found that demonstrating things physically to people can be a great aid in conveying a better understanding of things that aren't intuitive to them.

IWYW,
— Aswad.


Re: the balloon . . .
Gas is added into the balloon to cause expansion. As the balloon expands the gas inside becomes less dense.
As the Universe expands [current observations] gravity is overcome by the repelling force of dark energy. Yet, the density of dark energy remains constant???
The Universe expansion is accelerating in the outer regions proportional to distance from the Bang [i think] The further out a galaxy is, the greater is its red shift. Hubbell's calculation?
Explanation? Anyone.

(in reply to Aswad)
Profile   Post #: 321
RE: Indoctrination - 11/18/2012 5:19:59 PM   
GotSteel


Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
I think Toy of Rhamnusia is pretty much spot on in #304.

The notion that speculation is futile is possibly the most toxic idea ever.

People speculating on things they couldn't test is what got us to the point where we could test it, for one thing.


I don't know about the most toxic, but yeah it's not a great plan. That said I think that speculation is quite different from becoming deeply invested in conspiracy theories and that we'd be better off if more people would refrain from doing either one.

(in reply to Aswad)
Profile   Post #: 322
RE: Indoctrination - 11/18/2012 5:51:05 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

I don't know about the most toxic, but yeah it's not a great plan. That said I think that speculation is quite different from becoming deeply invested in conspiracy theories and that we'd be better off if more people would refrain from doing either one.

Perhaps. But wouldn't that be speculation on your part?

K.

(in reply to GotSteel)
Profile   Post #: 323
RE: Indoctrination - 11/18/2012 6:01:19 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:


Re: the balloon . . .
Gas is added into the balloon to cause expansion. As the balloon expands the gas inside becomes less dense.
As the Universe expands [current observations] gravity is overcome by the repelling force of dark energy. Yet, the density of dark energy remains constant???
The Universe expansion is accelerating in the outer regions proportional to distance from the Bang [i think] The further out a galaxy is, the greater is its red shift. Hubbell's calculation?
Explanation? Anyone.


Yes, bullshit.  the universe is expanding in every direction.  that is a period. up down back forth in and out.

It is not proportional to the bang, because it is possible the outer galaxies are expanding faster than the ones surrounding us, not having as much gravity due to density to hold them in check,  but as a statistical average it is the same.  In all directions.



_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 324
RE: Indoctrination - 11/18/2012 6:10:48 PM   
Aswad


Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

As the balloon expands the gas inside becomes less dense.


No.

quote:

As the Universe expands [current observations] gravity is overcome by the repelling force of dark energy.


No.

quote:

Yet, the density of dark energy remains constant???


Sort of.

quote:

The Universe expansion is accelerating in the outer regions proportional to distance from the Bang [i think]


No.

quote:

The further out a galaxy is, the greater is its red shift. Hubbell's calculation?


The faster it's moving away from us, the greater its red shift. Hubble, yes.

quote:

Explanation? Anyone.


Another exercise. Put a plug in the bottom of a funnel. Add some tiny styrofoam beads, the sort you get from crushing styrofoam. Pour in water slowly. This will make the surface of the water expand, much as the surface of the universe does. But the beads will clump together due to static electricity, much as gravity causes objects to be attracted to each other in space. As the water level rises and the surface expands, you are eventually left with a few scattered clumps of styrofoam in a large pool of water.

In the same way, after a long time, we would be left in the Milky Way with the space around us growing faster than anything can cross it, effectively alone. At some point after that, the expansion of space would be so fast that the space around the Sol solar system (the one we're in) would grow so fast that the Milky Way would seem to suddenly move away really quickly while growing redder and dimmer. A while later, the expansion would be so fast that the space around Earth itself would grow so fast that the Sun would seem to shrink and grow redder and dimmer; a short while after that, the Sun would be gone, beyond reach. Eventually, the space between molecules in our bodies would grow so fast that every atom was alone. Then the subatomic particles, until each of the smallest units possible was alone in a sea of nothingness, vast beyond imagining and growing too fast for anything to interact with anything else ever again.

Another alternative would be for the expansion to stop, in which case gravity would pull everything together into a massive black hole. Or, if the expansion due to the pressure of dark energy were balanced perfectly with the force of gravity, everything would stay where it is, a much slower end to things, where the universe would expend its energy in a static state until there was no energy left and everything just stayed frozen in place.

We're talking about some pretty long term stuff here, though.

IWYW,
— Aswad.


_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do.
" -- Rorschack, Watchmen.


(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 325
RE: Indoctrination - 11/18/2012 6:23:35 PM   
Aswad


Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

I don't know about the most toxic, but yeah it's not a great plan.


Agreed.

quote:

That said I think that speculation is quite different from becoming deeply invested in conspiracy theories and that we'd be better off if more people would refrain from doing either one.


There are a lot of things we would be better off if humans didn't do, most of which sadly have nothing to do with religion or any other identifiable external cause that could potentially be addressed, but rather are internal factors, a matter of our human natures. I would like to believe we're much better, but we aren't, which is the lament that the Catholics turned into an absurdly ironic large scale illustration of humans just not getting it even when getting it.

I have some ideas to perhaps improve these issues in the long run, but you probably wouldn't like them.

IWYW,
— Aswad.


_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do.
" -- Rorschack, Watchmen.


(in reply to GotSteel)
Profile   Post #: 326
RE: Indoctrination - 11/18/2012 8:12:24 PM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

I think Toy of Rhamnusia is pretty much spot on in #304.


The notion that speculation is futile is possibly the most toxic idea ever.

People speculating on things they couldn't test is what got us to the point where we could test it, for one thing.

IWYW,
— Asawad.


Good point.

Speculation tends to become toxic at the point when people attach a truth value to it. And when an absolute Truth Value is attached to speculation, it is toxic.

_____________________________



(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 327
RE: Indoctrination - 11/18/2012 9:06:56 PM   
Aswad


Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Speculation tends to become toxic at the point when people attach a truth value to it. And when an absolute Truth Value is attached to speculation, it is toxic.


Depends on the speculation.

I think it's probably not necessarily toxic to assign an absolute false to any speculation that some incorporeal being wants you to kill the neighbour for being gay, for instance, and it seems widely accepted that it's non-toxic to assign an absolute true to the speculation that no such being exists.

The toxic thing seems to be to fail to speculate.

For instance, failing to speculate whether one might be wrong is a very common mistake in the history of humankind, and one that appears to be the cause of many unfortunate stains on our record as a species. Elimination of speculation tends to eliminate the process of questioning the truth value of things that are taken to be true, a category that encompasses a majority portion of any human's beliefs (we don't all have time to verify everything for ourselves, after all).

We must always bear in mind that speculation can be the precursor to discovery or disaster, with equal ease.

IWYW,
— Aswad.


_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do.
" -- Rorschack, Watchmen.


(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 328
RE: Indoctrination - 11/19/2012 4:15:26 AM   
GotSteel


Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad
There are a lot of things we would be better off if humans didn't do, most of which sadly have nothing to do with religion or any other identifiable external cause that could potentially be addressed, but rather are internal factors, a matter of our human natures.


I have no idea how to sort out what doings of a human being are the result of nature versus nurture well enough to make a claim such as most. I'm not going to ask you to defend that part as I suspect it to be tangential to your point.

What I would like to know is, what's your point? Why is it that when atheists point out problems with religion so many theists feel the need to chime in that those aren't the only problems that exist as though there's somebody out there who doesn't get that?

(in reply to Aswad)
Profile   Post #: 329
RE: Indoctrination - 11/19/2012 5:13:54 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

As the balloon expands the gas inside becomes less dense.


No.

I was wrong. The density of gas remains the same because the balloon is expanding due to the addition of gas molecules.

quote:

As the Universe expands [current observations] gravity is overcome by the repelling force of dark energy.


quote:

No.

You will find here that dark energy is believed to be the cause of the expansion. Admittedly, here is a more recent alternative that the Expansion is an illusion because of the reverse (?) flow of our section of the Universe.

quote:

Yet, the density of dark energy remains constant???


quote:

Sort of.

Well, dark energy is increased at the expense of dark matter (?)

quote:

The Universe expansion is accelerating in the outer regions proportional to distance from the Bang [i think]


quote:

No.

According to Hubbell and his adherents, yes, maybe . . . lol!

quote:

The further out a galaxy is, the greater is its red shift. Hubbell's calculation?


The faster it's moving away from us, the greater its red shift. Hubble, yes.

quote:

Another exercise. Put a plug in the bottom of a funnel. Add some tiny styrofoam beads, the sort you get from crushing styrofoam. Pour in water slowly. This will make the surface of the water expand, much as the surface of the universe does. .

The difficulty I see in this model is that all of the galaxies would be of the same age . . .all as old as the Universe itself, just as all the styrofoam was formed at the same time. Furthermore, all galaxies would be the same distance from the Big Bang. Is that how you see it? Are not new galaxies being formed between the initial point and the outer surface of the Expansion? Were all galaxies formed at the same time? Keep in mind that space/time is not only expanding between galaxies it must also be expanding from the initial point. I read somewhere that while the Universe is 13.7 billion years in age the expansion is more in the vicinity of 45 billion light-years. I think I have that right.


quote:

In the same way, after a long time, we would be left in the Milky Way with the space around us growing faster than anything can cross it, effectively alone.

I watched a YouTube lecture in which the astrophysicist predicts a time when there will be no galaxies and/or stars visible in our night sky. Lawrence Krause


quote:

Another alternative would be for the expansion to stop, in which case gravity would pull everything together into a massive black hole. Or, if the expansion due to the pressure of dark energy were balanced perfectly with the force of gravity, everything would stay where it is, a much slower end to things, where the universe would expend its energy in a static state until there was no energy left and everything just stayed frozen in place. We're talking about some pretty long term stuff here, though.

The geometry of space/time does not support these alternatives. I can't explain but Krause does in the video I listed above.

Thanks for your patience, Aswad. I do understand the model you illustrated with the balloon and the styrofoam but not sure I can buy it. Well, I am struggling with contradictions I see. But, I am sure the Universe hardly gives a damn!

ciao!



< Message edited by vincentML -- 11/19/2012 5:48:52 AM >

(in reply to Aswad)
Profile   Post #: 330
RE: Indoctrination - 11/19/2012 8:47:22 AM   
Aswad


Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

What I would like to know is, what's your point? Why is it that when atheists point out problems with religion so many theists feel the need to chime in that those aren't the only problems that exist as though there's somebody out there who doesn't get that?


Here's my point.

Mr. White: Blacks are stupid and antiwhite.
Mr. Black: Whites are stupid and antiblack.
Bystander: Both skin colors are stupid and racist.
Observer: Race is a red herring; humans are stupid and bigoted.

Religion is the red herring, or to use Occam's, the needlessly posited entity, in almost every instance where atheists point at religion, and it pains me to see atheists not only sharing the same blind spots as theists, but assuming themselves not to because they think they lack the causative factor behind the blind spot, often making themselves doubly blind. I'm not saying this is true of all atheists, but I've seen it very often, both on this board and in the offline world, with alarming regularity.

If we were to scratch religion, we would spend a lot of time and effort on doing so, and the result would be something else would serve the same role in every negative trait there, and we would be no closer to figuring out how to successfully deal with the shortcomings of our species, and indeed would have eliminated yet another of those helpful contrasts by which we can infer the underlying mechanisms.

If we instead recognize humanity itself as the issue, and religion as entirely irrelevant to the question of improving humanity, then that same effort can be directed toward solving the right problem, without superfluous and confounding factors in the equation, and the benefit will persist regardless of what fills which role in human lives.

The presence of different religions helps us see reflected through the differences and commonalities those things that allows us to do the differential analysis that, in turn, permits us to infer more about our underlying nature, which gives more insight we can use to improve. When we see how different people from different backgrounds and points of view reason about a single topic, we can infer something of which things are related to background and which things are because of other factors, such as the essential humanity they share. This is important in describing essential humanity and in factorizing the contributions to thought patterns.

History will keep replaying its darker moments with or without religion, so long as we look for the simple reasons (e.g. "religion did it!"), rather than taking a long, hard look at ourselves as a species and start pinning down what our problems are and how to deal with them. Things like fundamentalism and extreme conservativism are not exclusive to religion, nor caused by it. Religion plus these things equals one problem. Atheism plus these things equals another flavor of the same problem. Most of these reagents are soluble in religion and atheism both, because they're soluble in humanity. If we don't keep the reagents and solvents straight, we'll still have an explosive mix on our hands. And we still won't know why, because we refuse to grasp the chemistry of it.

Of course, there's also a personal point to make:

I'm not particularly amused at being met with bigotry and prejudice for being religious, even though it's usually dispelled once people get to know me (bigotry and prejudice usually is, regardless of its nature), and particularly not when it's by people that believe bigotry and prejudice are somehow the province of religion, rather than people pinning that tail on the right donkey. If I'm a douche, it probably isn't due to being religious. And if a religious douche becomes an atheist, more often than not, s/he'll still be a douche. Same thing goes for ignorance, violence, closedmindedness, and any number of other descriptors one might be inclined to apply.

Do you really think I was a better person as an atheist, or had any fewer flaws?

Because that's apples to apples, right there.

I could analyze social problems in the USA in terms of race, based on a higher prevalence of crime with certain races, but that would be completely nonsensical, when we can analyze the factors and see that it's a matter of certain races being stuck with a higher incidence of the actual causatives due to historical reasons. Yes, correlative profiling has its place in some cases, but it's not a basis on which to solve profound problems or make strong assumptions. For that, we need causative information, not correlations.

IWYW,
— Aswad.


_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do.
" -- Rorschack, Watchmen.


(in reply to GotSteel)
Profile   Post #: 331
RE: Indoctrination - 11/19/2012 2:02:15 PM   
ToyOfRhamnusia


Posts: 99
Joined: 8/4/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

I think Toy of Rhamnusia is pretty much spot on in #304.


The notion that speculation is futile is possibly the most toxic idea ever.

People speculating on things they couldn't test is what got us to the point where we could test it, for one thing.

IWYW,
— Aswad.


Good point.


It is self-contradicting to seek to test something OUTSIDE the space/time realm with means that are INSIDE it, as our abilities to observe all are. At least for now. And if the whole concept of time/space as limited in itself is indeed correct, then we are NEVER going to change that!

There is a huge difference between this and a systematic exploration of our understanding of what we CAN measure, if we would just apply somecreativity. For THAT, Aswad's point is relevant, but that is NOT what we were discussing here.

If we want to explore and measure and understand what is going on OUTSIDE our time/space reality, we must first find ways of gathering information about it. So far, we have NONE, other than religion and speculation.

_____________________________

Toy of Rhamnusia

- Freedom includes the right to choose to enter into a contract that strips you of all rights...

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 332
RE: Indoctrination - 11/19/2012 2:36:09 PM   
Aylee


Posts: 24103
Joined: 10/14/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Space-time is expanding at an accelerating pace, we are told.
Where is it going if not outside space-time?


Umm... it's not going anywhere... it's expanding... becoming more space.

IWYW,
— Aswad.



It is going into the void, in which there is no space time, but both are created with the expansion and at that point (sorta) became real.

Hey, your year is 365 1/4 day..... a light year is what?

You ain't even a woodtick on the flea of a mosquito of a light years ass.........

What does that mean?  That entropy is a construct of humans, that's for sure.

Thats sorta a FR gusy.  But while we exist, we should get all the pussy we can, meaningless as it is...............you can quote me.  


A light year is a unit of distance, not of time.  It is how far light travels in a year in vacuum.  It is something like 6 trillion miles. 

As far as entropy goes, are you talking thermodynamics or statistical mechanics here?

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

I don’t always wgah’nagl fhtagn. But when I do, I ph’nglui mglw’nafh R’lyeh.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 333
RE: Indoctrination - 11/19/2012 2:46:00 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
Then it would be meaningless to ask how long a year is since time is not part of a year.  Wouldn't it.  I think time is one of the things we use to measure alot of stuff. 

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Aylee)
Profile   Post #: 334
RE: Indoctrination - 11/19/2012 2:48:28 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ToyOfRhamnusia

If we want to explore and measure and understand...

The "reduction of all knowledge to only that which is measurable" is a form of scientism.

K.

(in reply to ToyOfRhamnusia)
Profile   Post #: 335
RE: Indoctrination - 11/19/2012 3:20:57 PM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ToyOfRhamnusia


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

I think Toy of Rhamnusia is pretty much spot on in #304.


The notion that speculation is futile is possibly the most toxic idea ever.

People speculating on things they couldn't test is what got us to the point where we could test it, for one thing.

IWYW,
— Aswad.


Good point.


It is self-contradicting to seek to test something OUTSIDE the space/time realm with means that are INSIDE it, ...


That's not what he was proposing, nothing of the sort. This is not to say that there are not a plentitude of some sects of religious folks and likewise sects of atheists that insist upon this approach.

quote:

as our abilities to observe all are. At least for now. And if the whole concept of time/space as limited in itself is indeed correct, then we are NEVER going to change that!


Concepts, along with conceptualization, are not reality. What I think is being proposed is that much of what we now consider/accept as 'reality' started as conceptualization, speculation, etc. History also shows that accepted reality is also subject to the process of its own evolution, from the standpoint of humans. As one who, at one time, did a lot of reading on the history of science and the philosophy of science, that seems to be the consensus among the accepted and accredited experts on those topics.


quote:

There is a huge difference between this and a systematic exploration of our understanding of what we CAN measure, if we would just apply somecreativity. For THAT, Aswad's point is relevant, but that is NOT what we were discussing here.


Sorry, Thread Sheriff, but us Contemplative Cosmic Cowpokes are discussing a lot of things here.


quote:

If we want to explore and measure and understand what is going on OUTSIDE our time/space reality, we must first find ways of gathering information about it. So far, we have NONE, other than religion and speculation.



And theoretical physics, don't forget, which, as you and others observe (knowingly or not), is necessarily speculation.





< Message edited by Edwynn -- 11/19/2012 3:50:33 PM >

(in reply to ToyOfRhamnusia)
Profile   Post #: 336
RE: Indoctrination - 11/20/2012 5:13:37 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Then it would be meaningless to ask how long a year is since time is not part of a year.  Wouldn't it.  I think time is one of the things we use to measure alot of stuff. 



Time is just a conspiracy to keep everything from happening all at once.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 337
RE: Indoctrination - 11/21/2012 5:01:40 AM   
GotSteel


Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
Speculation tends to become toxic at the point when people attach a truth value to it. And when an absolute Truth Value is attached to speculation, it is toxic.

Depends on the speculation.

I think it's probably not necessarily toxic to assign an absolute false to any speculation that some incorporeal being wants you to kill the neighbour for being gay, for instance, and it seems widely accepted that it's non-toxic to assign an absolute true to the speculation that no such being exists.

Don't get me wrong I'll take the benevolent brain washed over the malevolent brain washed any day of the week.

However, I think that both groups are toxic. I think speculations great but this isn't speculation:







Attachment (1)

(in reply to Aswad)
Profile   Post #: 338
RE: Indoctrination - 11/21/2012 11:04:45 AM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

Don't get me wrong I'll take the benevolent brain washed over the malevolent brain washed any day of the week.

I don't think there's ever been much chance of anyone getting you wrong.

K.

(in reply to GotSteel)
Profile   Post #: 339
RE: Indoctrination - 11/21/2012 11:07:38 AM   
GotSteel


Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad
Do you really think I was a better person as an atheist, or had any fewer flaws?

Because that's apples to apples, right there.


I'm sorry that I haven't had the time to get to this sooner and don't have the time to write a reply to all of that lengthy response at the moment, hopefully tonight.

But I did want to say that no that's not apples to apples because there's only one of you. Your apple to apple is anecdotal evidence. I don't know you well enough before and after to be able to show how having faith in that position has effected you.

Do you think it's an isolated belief that doesn't effect anything else or has that belief been incorporated into your world view effecting other positions and is it taken as a premise from which to make future decisions and determine future positions?

(in reply to Aswad)
Profile   Post #: 340
Page:   <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Indoctrination Page: <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.172