“Revolution in Thought: A new look at determinism and free will"

[Elixir]

This is syllogistic reasoning at its worst.

Your opinion is noted.
As is the similarity of your “global solution” to all other “global solutions”.
You are welcome to your own ideas of how things like human behavior en masse can be influenced. I look forward to seeing some indication that it’s working.

 

[peacegirl]

This is syllogistic reasoning at its worst.

Your opinion is noted.
As is the similarity of your “global solution” to all other “global solutions”.
You are welcome to your own ideas of how things like human behavior en masse can be influenced. I look forward to seeing some indication that it’s working.

You are placing the cart before the horse. In order to see some indication that it’s working, the solution has to be understood and confirmed by science. Then the transition can begin. What you are saying is tantamount to seeing NASA send a rocket into space willy- nilly to see if it lands on the moon without any planned trajectory. It doesn’t work that way.

 

[Elixir]

the solution has to be understood and confirmed by science

“Science” doesn’t understand or confirm anything. Science is a methodology, not something that understands and confirms things. The understanding and confirmations come from PEOPLE, who are prone to misunderstanding, confirming false things and misapplying scientific methodology.
The notion that “science” is going to understand and/or confirm something that you already represent as “the solution” betrays that the cart in front of your horse is blocking your view of the road ahead.
Get back to me when a vast majority of reputable scientists, having rigorously adhered to scientific methodology, reach general agreement that specific empirical data are best explained by the facts you assume.

 

[peacegirl]

the solution has to be understood and confirmed by science

“Science” doesn’t understand or confirm anything. Science is a methodology, not something that understands and confirms things. The understanding and confirmations come from PEOPLE, who are prone to misunderstanding, confirming false things and misapplying scientific methodology.
The notion that “science” is going to understand and/or confirm something that you already represent as “the solution” betrays that the cart in front of your horse is blocking your view of the road ahead.
Get back to me when a vast majority of reputable scientists, having rigorously adhered to scientific methodology, reach general agreement that specific empirical data are best explained by the facts you assume.

Even in mathematics, there has to be an equation before it can be applied. We don't just build bridges without the knowledge beforehand how to do it. These were observations which are also part of epistemology. If you don't care to listen because you think a science experiment is the only way to finding truth, this is your prerogative but please stop posting. Thanking you in advance.

INTRODUCTION

Who… in his right mind or with knowledge of history, would believe it possible that the 20th century will be the time when all war, crime, and every form of evil or hurt in human relations must come to a permanent end? [Note: This is a reminder that the author lived in the 20th century (1918-1991). Though we are well into the 21st century, this discovery has yet to be given a thorough investigation by our world’s leading scientists]. When first hearing this prophecy, shortly after Hitler had slaughtered 6 million Jews, I laughed with contempt because nothing appeared more ridiculous than such a statement. But after 15 years (8 hours a day) of extensive reading and thinking, my dissatisfaction with a certain theory that had gotten a dogmatic hold on the mind compelled me to spend nine strenuous months in the deepest analysis and I made a finding that was so difficult to believe it took me two years to thoroughly understand its full significance for all mankind and three additional years to put it into the kind of language others could comprehend. It is the purpose of this book to reveal this finding — a scientific discovery about the nature of man whose life, as a direct consequence of this mathematical revelation, will be completely revolutionized in every way for his benefit bringing about a transition so utterly amazing that if I were to tell you of all the changes soon to unfold, without demonstrating the cause as to why these must come about, your skepticism would be aroused sufficiently to consider this a work of science fiction for who would believe it possible that all evil (every bit of hurt that exists in human relation) must decline and fall the very moment this discovery is thoroughly understood. This natural law, which reveals a fantastic mankind system, was hidden so successfully behind a camouflage of ostensible truths that it is no wonder the development of our present age was required to find it. By discovering this well- concealed law, and demonstrating its power, a catalyst, so to speak, is introduced into human relations that compels a fantastic change in the direction our nature has been traveling, performing what will be called miracles, though they do not transcend the laws of nature. The same nature that permits the most heinous crimes, and all the other evils of human relation, is going to veer so sharply in a different direction that all nations on this planet, once the leaders and their subordinates understand the principles involved, will unite in such a way that no more wars will ever again be possible. If this is difficult to conceive, does it mean you have a desire to dismiss what I have to say as nonsense? If it does, then you have done what I tried to prevent, that is, jumped to a premature conclusion. And the reason must be that you judged such a permanent solution as impossible and therefore not deserving of further consideration, which is a normal reaction, if anything, when my claims are analyzed and compared to our present understanding of human nature. War seems to be an inescapable feature of the human condition which can only be subdued, not eradicated. But we must insert a question mark between the empirical fact that a feature is characteristic of human life as we know it, and the empirical claim that this feature is a sociological inevitability. Another reason that war is viewed as an unfortunate and intractable aspect of human existence is due to suffering itself, which sadly robs its victims of the ability to dream or have the breadth of vision to even contemplate the possibility of peace. The evil in the world has so constricted man’s imagination that his mind has become hardened, and he shows contempt for anyone who dares to offer a solution because such claims appear ludicrous and unfounded.

Down through history there has always been this skepticism before certain events were proven true. It is only natural to be skeptical, but this is never a sufficient reason to exclude the possibility of a scientific miracle. You may reason that many people have been positive that they were right, but it turned out they were wrong, so couldn’t I also be positive and wrong? There is a fallacious standard hidden in this reasoning. Because others were positive and wrong, I could be wrong because I am positive. The first astronomer who observed the mathematical laws inherent in the solar system that enabled him to predict an eclipse was positive and right, as well as the space scientist who foretold that one day man would land on the moon. Edison when he first discovered the electric bulb was positive and right. Einstein when he revealed the potential of atomic energy was positive and right — and so were many other scientists — but they proved that they were right with an undeniable demonstration, which is what I am doing. If my demonstration doesn’t prove me right, then and then only am I wrong. There is quite a difference between being positive or dogmatic over knowledge that is questionable and being positive over something that is undeniable such as two plus two equals four. Just bear in mind how many times in the course of history has the impossible (that which appeared to be) been made possible by scientific discoveries which should make you desire to contain your skepticism enough to investigate what this is all about.

 

[Elixir]

Even in mathematics, there has to be an equation before it can be applied.

Mathematics ≠ science.

If you don't care to listen because you think a science experiment is the only way to finding truth, this is your prerogative but please stop posting.

Request denied on the basis that I think no such thing. My problem is your erroneous claim to being scientific. Pages of screed in response to a simple observation of your conflation, are a dead giveaway of vacuity.
I’ll take the bullet for unwillingness/ inability to muster the focus required to either find useful information, or offer a detail analysis of such a tome.

If your thesis is right, eventually someone will be able to offer a concise summation, but that ain’t in evidence. Meanwhile I believe I can safely retain my current evolution of habits and thoughts without significant detriment to the planet or its biosphere.

 

[peacegirl]

Even in mathematics, there has to be an equation before it can be applied.

Mathematics ≠ science.

If you don't care to listen because you think a science experiment is the only way to finding truth, this is your prerogative but please stop posting.

Request denied on the basis that I think no such thing. My problem is your erroneous claim to being scientific. Pages of screed in response to a simple observation of your conflation, are a dead giveaway of vacuity.
I’ll take the bullet for unwillingness/ inability to muster the focus required to either find useful information, or offer a detail analysis of such a tome.

If your thesis is right, eventually someone will be able to offer a concise summation, but that ain’t in evidence. Meanwhile I believe I can safely retain my current evolution of habits and thoughts without significant detriment to the planet or its biosphere.

Calm down. It's really okay for you to enjoy your current evolution of habits and thoughts without significant detriment to the planet or biosphere. No one is charging you of causing any detriment to the planet. Is this the pomposity that is becoming ever stronger?

 

[Elixir]

If my demonstration doesn’t prove me right, then and then only am I wrong

No. You can correctly predict things and still be wrong. Many pre-scientific cultures were able to predict sunrises, seasons and even eclipses. Their predictions may have been correct but attributions to gods causing such things, were not. A correct prediction SUPPORTS but does not prove.

My problem is your erroneous claim to being scientific.

My problem remains. Try harder.

 

[Jarhyn]

@peacegirl you are the one that said I implied autism is a sufficient cause. We're done at this point.

 

[peacegirl]

If my demonstration doesn’t prove me right, then and then only am I wrong

No. You can correctly predict things and still be wrong. Many pre-scientific cultures were able to predict sunrises, seasons and even eclipses. Their predictions may have been correct but attributions to gods causing such things, were not. A correct prediction SUPPORTS but does not prove.

My problem is your erroneous claim to being scientific.

My problem remains. Try harder.

No, I will not try harder than you will to meet me halfway, and you're not doing that. You're full of accusations and you haven't a clue what this is about. I refuse to spoon feed it to you. You are pompous, by the way.

 

[peacegirl]

@peacegirl you are the one that said I implied autism is a sufficient cause. We're done at this point.

This is what you said.
"Yes, they came into the world via the birth canal of the parents who fucked so as to produce them.

Yes, they were born that way, and while SOME may have some outsized ability to be intelligent enough to think past their deficiencies, many will not.

Perhaps for some this is a function of experience, but this does not change what they are: those whose greatest satisfaction is diametrically opposed to you having satisfaction, and whose mere existence as they are makes them responsible for all manner of heinousness from our perspective.

Your worldview is childishly naive, and I say this from the perspective of such a monster who was lucky enough to be born intelligent enough to step away from that behavior, however it makes me feel.

There are of course artifacts of that drive towards the world wide wasteland in my behavior still. Namely that I don't treat such naivety with kid gloves.

To stop these people as they are today you cannot respond to their childhoods because their childhood is dead and gone as the past ever is. You have to say as a mature adult "it doesn't matter what made them as they are, they ARE as they are and as such THEY are responsible for their own actions, the object that they are is responsible for the wills they form, and I will level that response that I am able to." You also wrote:

Although we should be quite clear here: Managed to fight clear because I was intelligent, but while intelligence is often necessary to think clear of that affect, it is only rarely sufficient: you need at least a few things you like outside of the warmth of the tire fires of the world wide wasteland to require society."

Maybe I misunderstood the way you blamed one's intelligence for one's mistakes. I didn't realize I would hit a nerve. I don't think it has anything to do with intelligence per se. Twins can have the same intellectual capacity but one could become a killer while the other could become a respected professor depending on their different home environments growing up. Sorry I offended you so deeply, but if you want to be done, that's okay. Do what you need to do.

 

[Elixir]

Twins can have the same intellectual capacity but one could become a killer while the other could become a respected professor depending on their different home environments growing up.

It is very likely that intelligence IS the lethal mutation. You can’t kill the killer without killing the professor. The factor(s) that turn the newborn into one, the other or both, are not separable from the forces that work on all of us.

/$.02

 

[peacegirl]

If my demonstration doesn’t prove me right, then and then only am I wrong

No. You can correctly predict things and still be wrong. Many pre-scientific cultures were able to predict sunrises, seasons and even eclipses. Their predictions may have been correct but attributions to gods causing such things, were not. A correct prediction SUPPORTS but does not prove.

My problem is your erroneous claim to being scientific.

My problem remains. Try harder.

Please don't talk to me about trying harder. You have no idea how hard it was for this author and for the discoverers whose works were not taken seriously during their lifetime. Fortunately, truth has a way of coming to the surface when the time is right.

 

[Elixir]

Fortunately, truth has a way of coming to the surface when the time is right.

Yeah, all things in good time.
?
Are we there yet?
No?
Are you trying to hasten the arrival of “the right time”?
Bless you then, and good luck. Really. You know what you’re doing better than anyone can tell you. May all your efforts produce the desired results.

 

[peacegirl]

Twins can have the same intellectual capacity but one could become a killer while the other could become a respected professor depending on their different home environments growing up.

It is very likely that intelligence IS the lethal mutation. You can’t kill the killer without killing the professor. The factor(s) that turn the newborn into one, the other or both, are not separable from the forces that work on all of us.

/$.02

Twins can have the same intellectual capacity but one could become a killer while the other could become a respected professor depending on their different home environments growing up.

It is very likely that intelligence IS the lethal mutation. You can’t kill the killer without killing the professor. The factor(s) that turn the newborn into one, the other or both, are not separable from the forces that work on all of us.

/$.02

How is intelligence the lethal mutation, when twins have the same intelligence? The only difference is that one twin was not loved so he got his love from being part of a gang. How does a mutation have anything to do with it? There are environmental forces that have been shown to create monsters or Mother Teresa's. Genetic expression is only one factor, because the environment has to turn it on. This is clearly true where twins are concerned. If we had good upbringings, we are the lucky ones, but can you blame the monster whose genetic predisposition to violence was set into motion due to a difficult home life? I'm not saying that we should set these people free, but wouldn't it be better if we could prevent these heinous crimes before they happen rather than after?

 

[Elixir]

How is intelligence the lethal mutation, when twins have the same intelligence?

The lethality (if it exists) accrues to the species, not the individual.
Could be a reason we have yet to find any sign of extraterrestrial intelligent species.

 

[peacegirl]

How is intelligence the lethal mutation, when twins have the same intelligence?

The lethality (if it exists) accrues to the species, not the individual.

The potential, yes. Anyone could become a criminal but again, the perfect storm has to occur between nature and nurture. It doesn’t happen in a vacuum.

 

[Elixir]

The potential, yes. Anyone could become a criminal but again, the perfect storm has to occur between nature and nurture. It doesn’t happen in a vacuum.

Species extinction can occur from changes in the fitness landscape or from altered collective behavior intra-species.
In the case of intelligent species it is very possible that extinction is the default - or that intelligence is the perfect storm, if you prefer.

 

[peacegirl]

The potential, yes. Anyone could become a criminal but again, the perfect storm has to occur between nature and nurture. It doesn’t happen in a vacuum.

Species extinction can occur from changes in the fitness landscape or from altered collective behavior intra-species.
In the case of intelligent species it is very possible that extinction is the default - or that intelligence is the perfect storm, if you prefer.

I think that we are an intelligent species and as such, we have the capacity to figure out how to avoid extinction by changing the fitness landscape or, as you say, by altering the collective behavior intra-species. That's why I'm here. To show that there is a way of preventing the things that we don't want, such as war and crime. These things are not necessarily part of our DNA. Yes, self-preservation is the first law of nature, but we can help to preserve everyone's right to survive by giving them basic sustenance no matter where on earth they live.

 

[Elixir]

we have the capacity to figure out how to avoid extinction by changing the fitness landscape or, as you say, by altering the collective behavior intra-species.

Yeah I agree. “We” have the ability to figure it out. That ability and $7 gets you a mocha latté made from finest Sumatran coffee, South American cacao and Wisconsin Dairy cow milk, delivered in seconds by a smiling college student.
Even actually figuring it out doesn’t get you much more.

Take a good look at the landscape alterations we have effected to date, and tell me if we are getting more, or less secure as a species. Personally I find it a tough call, and I’m heavily biased in favor of species survival.

 

[peacegirl]

we have the capacity to figure out how to avoid extinction by changing the fitness landscape or, as you say, by altering the collective behavior intra-species.

Yeah I agree. “We” have the ability to figure it out. That ability and $7 gets you a mocha latté made from finest Sumatran coffee, South American cacao and Wisconsin Dairy cow milk, delivered in seconds by a smiling college student.
Even actually figuring it out doesn’t get you much more.

Take a good look at the landscape alterations we have effected to date, and tell me if we are getting more, or less secure as a species. Personally I find it a tough call, and I’m heavily biased in favor of species survival.

Think about this. A person is very ill and has all kinds of symptoms that appear unrelated. Then they find out that all of the symptoms this person is experiencing is coming from one root cause. Once this individual takes certain steps to eliminate the cause, his symptoms will miraculously disappear. Similarly, it appears that the landscape alternations that have been implemented in our society are not getting to the root cause. Once we do, all of the ills plaguing mankind will miraculously disappear.