Oh yeah straightforward, his "pollyannism", a term not defined on wikipedia or dictionary.com.
An honest enough atheist with Dawkins' education should quickly come to realize that this life thing is a pretty grim enterprise, and that there is nothing to be optimistic about. You have to be pretty self-absorbed to know about the world's suffering, the selfish gene stuff, life being arbitrary, etc. and still being cheerful about it all.
Yeah I couldn't tell if there was a philosophical concept here or not, but you're pretty much confirming that its just high-school-goth like negativity.
1
NMcNasty United States. Jan 14 2012 14:51. Posts 2041
On January 14 2012 12:26 zulu_nation8 wrote:
I actually respect Dawkins a little more now having read that passage.
On January 13 2012 22:49 Baalim wrote:
Loco its meaningless what that retarded swami thinks its the definition of religion, what he describes is NOT religion, ""To devote your life to the good of all and to the happiness of all is cheese. Whatever you do for your own sake is not cheese." the word religion has its own meaning he is just trying to clean it redefining it.
There isn't one definition of religion that says that it has to be what you say it is (entirely negative) for all religions. In the context of his religion, it is entirely correct that this is the end goal. Gandhi was not motivated to do what he did because of cheese, but because of his religion, which was entirely peaceful and altruistic. Are you going to deny that Gandhi brought more peace and freedom to India and the world? I don't think so. Gandhi said that his whole life was an effort to bring into actions the ideas of Vivekananda. So what that "retarded Swami thinks" apparently mattered more than what you think.
On January 13 2012 22:49 Baalim wrote:
Also a quick Wikipedia shows that Swami believes in levitation, mind reading, living without breathing and other ridiculous shit so he is just another delusional religious nutjob
What are you talking about? Did you even read the previous paragraph to that? "Vivekananda did not advocate the emerging area of parapsychology and astrology."
The thing you're quoting only said that he is exploring these claims in his book, i.e., what he has observed and heard of about them, not that he blindly believes in any of it. In fact, he says it right after: "It is wrong to believe blindly. You must exercise your own reason and judgment; you must practise, and see whether these things happen or not. Just as you would take up any other science, exactly in the same manner you should take up this science for study."
And even if he DID believe in those things, he would still be a great man, and according to his approach to it he would've had reason to believe. How many great men had your Randi skepticism thorough out the ages? Not very many, and certainly no visionaries. You probably think that William James is a delusional retard too, and Carl Jung as well, while ignoring how influential they were. The thing that you are quick to ignore is that if someone's beliefs lead him to lead a truly virtuous life they are justified. I see him just like I see Marcus Aurelius. Can I believe what they believed knowing what I know? No. But can I see how it served them to discipline themselves and make them great human beings? Yes. And Vivekananda studied Hume, Kant, Schopenhauer, Hegel, Darwin, Spinoza and many others. No one who studied these thinkers seriously is a 'delusional retard'; and few Hindus did, so he is exceptional.
He said that he observed some of those phenomenoms which we know are not true, so that makes him dishonest, in a way that he will make up shit that accomodates his beliefs rather than seek the truth
He's not the only person that I consider very reasonable that has reported having seen things that are out of the ordinary. I don't see why you have a problem with him, did he try to sell his knowledge? Did he scam anyone with pseudoscience? No. Like I said in my first post, perhaps there is something about religious experiences that give important insights into the psyche and they should not be dismissed on the ground that there is no convincing empirical data at the moment. But this is a true derailing of this thread, not my talking about Dawkins.
And your claim that he wasn't seeking the truth is absurd. It's like saying the Buddha wasn't seeking the truth if you found out he had some things to say about paranormal phenomena, seriously. There is no other religion that is more concerned with seeking the truth than Vedanta and Buddhism.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
Oh yeah straightforward, his "pollyannism", a term not defined on wikipedia or dictionary.com.
An honest enough atheist with Dawkins' education should quickly come to realize that this life thing is a pretty grim enterprise, and that there is nothing to be optimistic about. You have to be pretty self-absorbed to know about the world's suffering, the selfish gene stuff, life being arbitrary, etc. and still being cheerful about it all.
Yeah I couldn't tell if there was a philosophical concept here or not, but you're pretty much confirming that its just high-school-goth like negativity.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
Last edit: 14/01/2012 15:07
1
terrybunny19240 United States. Jan 14 2012 15:15. Posts 13829
pretty rofl thread, A+ job team!
Its a shame baal, locoo, have been raping their arguments so hard.. nothing for me to put in here!
Its astounding that D_smart_S talks about understanding quantum mechanics and then says something along the lines of 'u dont need that complex boring math or physics shit to understand it'
BTW zulu what do you think of these people's beliefs and chance at salvation?
On January 13 2012 22:49 Baalim wrote:
Loco its meaningless what that retarded swami thinks its the definition of religion, what he describes is NOT religion, ""To devote your life to the good of all and to the happiness of all is cheese. Whatever you do for your own sake is not cheese." the word religion has its own meaning he is just trying to clean it redefining it.
There isn't one definition of religion that says that it has to be what you say it is (entirely negative) for all religions. In the context of his religion, it is entirely correct that this is the end goal. Gandhi was not motivated to do what he did because of cheese, but because of his religion, which was entirely peaceful and altruistic. Are you going to deny that Gandhi brought more peace and freedom to India and the world? I don't think so. Gandhi said that his whole life was an effort to bring into actions the ideas of Vivekananda. So what that "retarded Swami thinks" apparently mattered more than what you think.
On January 13 2012 22:49 Baalim wrote:
Also a quick Wikipedia shows that Swami believes in levitation, mind reading, living without breathing and other ridiculous shit so he is just another delusional religious nutjob
What are you talking about? Did you even read the previous paragraph to that? "Vivekananda did not advocate the emerging area of parapsychology and astrology."
The thing you're quoting only said that he is exploring these claims in his book, i.e., what he has observed and heard of about them, not that he blindly believes in any of it. In fact, he says it right after: "It is wrong to believe blindly. You must exercise your own reason and judgment; you must practise, and see whether these things happen or not. Just as you would take up any other science, exactly in the same manner you should take up this science for study."
And even if he DID believe in those things, he would still be a great man, and according to his approach to it he would've had reason to believe. How many great men had your Randi skepticism thorough out the ages? Not very many, and certainly no visionaries. You probably think that William James is a delusional retard too, and Carl Jung as well, while ignoring how influential they were. The thing that you are quick to ignore is that if someone's beliefs lead him to lead a truly virtuous life they are justified. I see him just like I see Marcus Aurelius. Can I believe what they believed knowing what I know? No. But can I see how it served them to discipline themselves and make them great human beings? Yes. And Vivekananda studied Hume, Kant, Schopenhauer, Hegel, Darwin, Spinoza and many others. No one who studied these thinkers seriously is a 'delusional retard'; and few Hindus did, so he is exceptional.
He said that he observed some of those phenomenoms which we know are not true, so that makes him dishonest, in a way that he will make up shit that accomodates his beliefs rather than seek the truth
He's not the only person that I consider very reasonable that has reported having seen things that are out of the ordinary. I don't see why you have a problem with him, did he try to sell his knowledge? Did he scam anyone with pseudoscience? No. Like I said in my first post, perhaps there is something about religious experiences that give important insights into the psyche and they should not be dismissed on the ground that there is no convincing empirical data at the moment. But this is a true derailing of this thread, not my talking about Dawkins.
And your claim that he wasn't seeking the truth is absurd. It's like saying the Buddha wasn't seeking the truth if you found out he had some things to say about paranormal phenomena, seriously. There is no other religion that is more concerned with seeking the truth than Vedanta and Buddhism.
I didnt mean dishonest to others, but to himself as his own beliefs, self delusion like believing it exists is one thing, but claiming to be somewhat of an skeptic (as he did) yet claiming that he personally observed these obvious false things simply exposes dishonesty, how is this innacurate?, he is flat out lying.
Ex-PokerStars Team Pro Online
1
NMcNasty United States. Jan 14 2012 15:31. Posts 2041
Obviously their search engines suck, but I stand corrected.
A quick judgment with absolutely no evidence to back up your statement.
There's no "evidence" needed here, my point is that its a matter of perspective.
"The glass is half full."
"No, the glass is half empty, you obviously don't have a extended education, please provide evidence supporting your position."
1
zulu_nation8 United States. Jan 14 2012 15:35. Posts 1929
On January 14 2012 14:15 Night2o1 wrote:
pretty rofl thread, A+ job team!
Its a shame baal, locoo, have been raping their arguments so hard.. nothing for me to put in here!
Its astounding that D_smart_S talks about understanding quantum mechanics and then says something along the lines of 'u dont need that complex boring math or physics shit to understand it'
BTW zulu what do you think of these people's beliefs and chance at salvation?
o u think im the religious idiot cuz i no rike richard dawkins, aw
For you to think that everyone on here would ever expect you to grasp even the most basic concepts of quantum physics (mechanics) let alone gain enough insight as to make a prediction regarding the existence of the soul is flat out fucking insane. Your "research" (a word of which you make a complete mockery) has only ever consisted of a spew of youtube videos posted by other gimp loons.
It probably shouldn't of even been "almost anyone" as I suspect no one is qualified to talk about quantum mechanics at any length (ie/ past a "Quantum Mechanics for Dummies" level) on this forum. At least I don't recall seeing any evidence (hopefully there is someone here and you can engage them with your drivel and they can promptly shut you down for us all to enjoy).
Edit: And feel free to elaborate on "afterlife research" surely any thing else past this topic is pretty redundant in proving a sould exists.
So you come to the conclusion that my research is just watching youtube videos because I post videos when I try to share an idea? Would you prefer to read a book or a whole page from a book I have read on the subject? The easiest way to grasp a new concept is through video because you can visualize it much much better than by reading. That's why people prefer TV than books cause it flows easier and faster into their brain. Is this a new concept to you?
To Baal: Quantum Physics on its own might not fully prove to you the existence of soul but it's the thing that you can't go without because it's the purely scientific side of the proving process. Here is a short clip that I have found to explain very well one of the most famous and fundamental experiments done in Quantum Physics - the double slit experiment. Watch it carefully and try to deduct as much conclusions as possible. Try to put yourself in the shoes of the scientists who have done the experiment and think - what does it mean? What scientific conclusion about the nature of life can I make through this experiment.
Tell me what conclusions you have made based solely on this experiment. Think scientifically.
Zep: When I said I feel obligated to troll, it was a figure of speech
Last edit: 14/01/2012 16:10
1
terrybunny19240 United States. Jan 14 2012 16:37. Posts 13829
On January 14 2012 14:15 Night2o1 wrote:
pretty rofl thread, A+ job team!
Its a shame baal, locoo, have been raping their arguments so hard.. nothing for me to put in here!
Its astounding that D_smart_S talks about understanding quantum mechanics and then says something along the lines of 'u dont need that complex boring math or physics shit to understand it'
BTW zulu what do you think of these people's beliefs and chance at salvation?
o u think im the religious idiot cuz i no rike richard dawkins, aw
Naw I just remember you as being religious and I always like to try to wrap my head around christian's rationalizations about the reasons those who may have never heard of their specific religion may or may not be going to hell
A quick judgment with absolutely no evidence to back up your statement.
There's no "evidence" needed here, my point is that its a matter of perspective.
"The glass is half full."
"No, the glass is half empty, you obviously don't have a extended education, please provide evidence supporting your position."
The evidence needed is for the claim that all pessimism can only be silly high-school mentality that you grow out of. You were mocking a whole body of philosophy and literature just because it doesn't appeal to your particular taste. You made it seem like all the serious thinkers who "saw the glass half empty" (which is a stupid expression when it's about finding life to be inherently negative) were or are in some way similar to over-sensitive goth teenagers. I'm not going to deny that there is a kind of juvenile pessimism that can appeal to these people, but it's clearly ridiculous to generalize the way you did and dismiss philosophical pessimism. You are also attempting to deny the genuine implications of an unintelligent design and trivialize the enormous amounts of suffering that sentient life undergoes at every given minute.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
1
palak United States. Jan 14 2012 16:41. Posts 4601
that video is a TERRIBLE explanation of the double slit + Show Spoiler +
better off the top of my head version (poor math wording but meh)
---------------a
x---------------------------y
---------------b
electron at x can go through slit a or b in order to get to y, equal probability it will go through a or b when leaving x. If electron goes through a it will hit y with probability amplitude m, if it goes through b it will hit y with probability amplitude n...electron spin can be up or down (no measuring)..
if you block off b the an electron will hit y with probability m^2 (it can only go through a)..since probability is just the amplitude squared. This is the same as a standard particle. If we block a then it hits y with probability n^2 (since it can only go through b). So standard particle would reach y from x with a total probability of m^2+n^2
But if you start at point x giving the particle the probability of going through a or b then you need to add the amplitudes before squaring so the probability the particles arrives at y becomes (m+n)^2 which obv gives m^2+2mn+n^2, this principle is what causes the wave function.
When observing a particles you must isolate it's spin, so it leaves the electon emittor with a spin which is known, either up or down. We will say down and observ if the particle goes through a but changing the spin to up if it does. Therefore the particles becomes
---------------au
xd-----------------------------y
---------------bd
this causes the formula for amplitude to collapse since we are interferring with the particle by our observing of it. Meaning the function for probability will not allow additive but will cancel instead giving effectively (m+n)*(m-n) giving us probability of arriving at y of m^2+n^2 which is the expected particle distribution. There is no "the electron knows it is being watched" bullshit, we are simply fucking with it because the system is to small for us to observe without causing a noticeable change in the system
Text or video the point is to make sense of the experiment. I am curious what conclusions LPers would make based on it.
Zep: When I said I feel obligated to troll, it was a figure of speech
1
palak United States. Jan 14 2012 17:01. Posts 4601
there are no further conclusions to make, that experiment is roughly 200 years old, the conclusions drawn from it are simply further confirmation that the mathematics (specifically probability distributions) behind quantum mechanics agree with observed phenomena
dont tap the glass...im about ready to take a fucking hammer to the aquarium
Last edit: 14/01/2012 17:02
1
zulu_nation8 United States. Jan 14 2012 17:04. Posts 1929
On January 14 2012 14:15 Night2o1 wrote:
pretty rofl thread, A+ job team!
Its a shame baal, locoo, have been raping their arguments so hard.. nothing for me to put in here!
Its astounding that D_smart_S talks about understanding quantum mechanics and then says something along the lines of 'u dont need that complex boring math or physics shit to understand it'
BTW zulu what do you think of these people's beliefs and chance at salvation?
o u think im the religious idiot cuz i no rike richard dawkins, aw
Naw I just remember you as being religious and I always like to try to wrap my head around christian's rationalizations about the reasons those who may have never heard of their specific religion may or may not be going to hell
im actually not religious, but way to assume i am because i think internet atheists are idiots, and way to assume because i might be religious i'm definitely christian, and way to project all your hilariously misinformed prejudices onto me, you see i can be condescending and dismissive too, you sound like you have a lot of interesting opinions about how like, god can't logically exist and stuff bro
On January 14 2012 16:01 palak wrote: there are no further conclusions to make, that experiment is roughly 200 years old, the conclusions drawn from it are simply further confirmation that the mathematics (specifically probability distributions) behind quantum mechanics agree with observed phenomena
I feel very sorry for you.
Zep: When I said I feel obligated to troll, it was a figure of speech
Last edit: 14/01/2012 17:12
1
terrybunny19240 United States. Jan 14 2012 17:12. Posts 13829
So I watched your video on the double slit experiment, I'm not exactly sure what kind of "conclusions" could possibly be made from that video, except that matter can act as a particle and as a wave. So what?
On January 14 2012 14:15 Night2o1 wrote:
pretty rofl thread, A+ job team!
Its a shame baal, locoo, have been raping their arguments so hard.. nothing for me to put in here!
Its astounding that D_smart_S talks about understanding quantum mechanics and then says something along the lines of 'u dont need that complex boring math or physics shit to understand it'
BTW zulu what do you think of these people's beliefs and chance at salvation?
o u think im the religious idiot cuz i no rike richard dawkins, aw
Naw I just remember you as being religious and I always like to try to wrap my head around christian's rationalizations about the reasons those who may have never heard of their specific religion may or may not be going to hell
im actually not religious, but way to assume i am because i think internet atheists are idiots, and way to assume because i might be religious i'm definitely christian, and way to project all your hilariously misinformed prejudices onto me, you see i can be condescending and dismissive too, you sound like you have a lot of interesting opinions about how like, god can't logically exist and stuff bro
hmm you sure are hostile
I thought you were christian because I thought you had explicitly mentioned it on the forum before, my bad. some of your posts in this thread had me rolling tho, so thanks anyway
D_smart_S
well I think you have gotten a sufficient amount of action on your video by now, it really is not a very good explanation of the double slit experiment at all either so......................
Contact Users: 610 Active, 0 Logged in - Time: 08:14
United States. Jan 14 2012 14:49. Posts 2041
,
,
,
,
,
,
