Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [existlist] neurons firing: part 2

Expand Messages
  • Dustin Pickering
    I agree here. I read an article once that broke love down into chemical responses in the brain...I found it awfully pathetic. ...
    Message 1 of 8 , Mar 3, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      I agree here. I read an article once that broke love
      down into chemical responses in the brain...I found it
      awfully pathetic.



      --- jser1692 <jser1692@...> wrote:
      > I forgot to address this part of the post in my
      > response; I appologize.
      >
      > >where we have run into a problem is that we might
      > wish to
      > >force others to have the same interpretation and
      > this leads to inquisitions
      > >and burnings on the cross ...
      >
      > Indeed, the forcing of one's interpretation on
      > others is the ultimate problem.
      > I hold neither religion nor science as the bearer
      > of Truth. Inquisitions and
      > burnings on the cross demonstrate the hiddeous
      > excesses of forcing upon others
      > the christian interpretation of Truth. While it
      > would be ignorant to believe
      > that such things no longer happen, it would be
      > unrealistic to believe that
      > they happen with equal consistency, on an equal
      > scale as such in past times.
      > Further, such oppressive tendencies, though
      > tragically powerful, present a
      > clear front for resistance. Now, would it be
      > misguided to say that science,
      > once entirely threatened by religion, now holds the
      > higher ground - at least
      > in western society? Personally, I see christianity
      > taking a back seat to the
      > findings of this study, that survey, this finding,
      > etc, concerning the means
      > for directing one's life. The inherent dangers in a
      > culture dominated by
      > scientific (more accurately, scientism) processes,
      > are founded in my prior
      > post. Reducing a thinking, feeling, and vulnerable
      > being to neurons
      > firing-and all of those other "workings" that do
      > little for humanity, save
      > turning it into machines to further the agenda of
      > scientism- results in pain
      > and misery on a level entirely different form that
      > of the christian
      > inquisition. The oppression is invisible; that is,
      > of course, until one turns
      > on the television, converses with a coworker, or
      > connects to the internet.
      > What I hope to have related in this response, is
      > that the criticism of
      > religion, at this point in history, is entirely too
      > safe. While any given
      > interpretation of Truth warrants a good
      > re-examination, it seems that the
      > motives of such examinations are, at best, shady in
      > the hands of one
      > subscribing to a dominant interpretation.
      > regards,
      > John
      >
      >
      >
      > From The Exist List...
      > http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >


      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
      http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
    • Edward Alf
      hi again RL, in a sense, science has taken a dominant position ... or perhaps we should say that science provides words which are better understood, at least
      Message 2 of 8 , Mar 5, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        hi again RL,

        in a sense, science has taken a dominant position ... or perhaps we should
        say that science provides words which are better understood, at least in
        western society ...

        but religion, as we perceive it in hind-sight did have its role ... it
        allowed us to survive ... i use the word "us" in the social sense, since the
        "individual" is a modern concept ... keep in mind that it was the christian
        church which, for all its wrongs, did maintain knowledge through the dark
        ages ...

        and the inquisition was not in a sense wrong ... although it was carried to
        an extreme, especially in spain ... the perpetrators thought with some
        justification that they were doing the right thing ... in that era, the
        torments that were seen as occurring to those who went to hell, were much
        worse than could be done by the inquisition ... thus it was seen as better
        to crush a foot in a vice if this resulted in repentance and avoidance of
        hell ... in this, im not condoning the inquisitions actions, but only
        pointing out that they are explainable ... they have to be looked at in
        terms of the environment at the time, rather than in what we experience
        today ...

        i do not see a world based upon only science ... which is the reason for my
        assertion that the brain is "wired for spirituality" ... regardless of what
        science may bring to our knowledge, there is still a need for something more
        ... what i see happening in the 21st century is a progressive merger of
        science and religion ... my fear is what that religion may be ... with the
        completion of the human gnome project, we are able to "design" ourselves ..
        that is we can become an active participant in our own evolution ... but
        that raises the question of where we would be headed ... who will make the
        decisions on what future humans will be like? ... will we have the sort of
        two level society as detailed in the book, "The Time Machine"? ... that of
        grotesque workers living underground and the beautiful elite on the surface
        who serve as food for the workers? ... at least the christian church
        (regardless of some of its own actions) put forth the premise of loving one
        another ...

        existentialism is one manner of interpretation ... it is based upon man and
        the idea of defining himself through his existence ... Sartre's view was
        that of an atheist ... in my journey to date, im not sure if this is really
        fulfilling of my needs for spirituality ... i would take it that this was
        true for Sartre, but is it true in the common sense of mankind in general
        ... do we need something more ...

        regards

        eduard


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "jser1692" <jser1692@...>
        To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2001 11:36 AM
        Subject: [existlist] neurons firing: part 2


        > I forgot to address this part of the post in my response; I appologize.
        >
        > >where we have run into a problem is that we might wish to
        > >force others to have the same interpretation and this leads to
        inquisitions
        > >and burnings on the cross ...
        >
        > Indeed, the forcing of one's interpretation on others is the ultimate
        problem.
        > I hold neither religion nor science as the bearer of Truth. Inquisitions
        and
        > burnings on the cross demonstrate the hiddeous excesses of forcing upon
        others
        > the christian interpretation of Truth. While it would be ignorant to
        believe
        > that such things no longer happen, it would be unrealistic to believe that
        > they happen with equal consistency, on an equal scale as such in past
        times.
        > Further, such oppressive tendencies, though tragically powerful, present a
        > clear front for resistance. Now, would it be misguided to say that
        science,
        > once entirely threatened by religion, now holds the higher ground - at
        least
        > in western society? Personally, I see christianity taking a back seat to
        the
        > findings of this study, that survey, this finding, etc, concerning the
        means
        > for directing one's life. The inherent dangers in a culture dominated by
        > scientific (more accurately, scientism) processes, are founded in my prior
        > post. Reducing a thinking, feeling, and vulnerable being to neurons
        > firing-and all of those other "workings" that do little for humanity, save
        > turning it into machines to further the agenda of scientism- results in
        pain
        > and misery on a level entirely different form that of the christian
        > inquisition. The oppression is invisible; that is, of course, until one
        turns
        > on the television, converses with a coworker, or connects to the internet.
        > What I hope to have related in this response, is that the criticism of
        > religion, at this point in history, is entirely too safe. While any given
        > interpretation of Truth warrants a good re-examination, it seems that the
        > motives of such examinations are, at best, shady in the hands of one
        > subscribing to a dominant interpretation.
        > regards,
        > John
        >
        >
        >
        > From The Exist List...
        > http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >
        >
      • Paul R Turner
        When we reduce human actions and emotions to scientific explanation we risk the parochial view of the genetic fallacy , as Freud did in his analysis of
        Message 3 of 8 , Mar 5, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          When we reduce human actions and emotions to scientific explanation we risk the parochial view of the 'genetic fallacy', as Freud did in his analysis of religion.

          By concluding religion was symptomatic of a neurosis it became easy to dismiss the benefits of a religious life (though I am an atheist).

          Regards

          Paul

          --

          On Sat, 3 Mar 2001 17:16:45
          Dustin Pickering wrote:
          >I agree here. I read an article once that broke love
          >down into chemical responses in the brain...I found it
          >awfully pathetic.
          >
          >
          >
          >--- jser1692 <jser1692@...> wrote:
          >> I forgot to address this part of the post in my
          >> response; I appologize.
          >>
          >> >where we have run into a problem is that we might
          >> wish to
          >> >force others to have the same interpretation and
          >> this leads to inquisitions
          >> >and burnings on the cross ...
          >>
          >> Indeed, the forcing of one's interpretation on
          >> others is the ultimate problem.
          >> I hold neither religion nor science as the bearer
          >> of Truth. Inquisitions and
          >> burnings on the cross demonstrate the hiddeous
          >> excesses of forcing upon others
          >> the christian interpretation of Truth. While it
          >> would be ignorant to believe
          >> that such things no longer happen, it would be
          >> unrealistic to believe that
          >> they happen with equal consistency, on an equal
          >> scale as such in past times.
          >> Further, such oppressive tendencies, though
          >> tragically powerful, present a
          >> clear front for resistance. Now, would it be
          >> misguided to say that science,
          >> once entirely threatened by religion, now holds the
          >> higher ground - at least
          >> in western society? Personally, I see christianity
          >> taking a back seat to the
          >> findings of this study, that survey, this finding,
          >> etc, concerning the means
          >> for directing one's life. The inherent dangers in a
          >> culture dominated by
          >> scientific (more accurately, scientism) processes,
          >> are founded in my prior
          >> post. Reducing a thinking, feeling, and vulnerable
          >> being to neurons
          >> firing-and all of those other "workings" that do
          >> little for humanity, save
          >> turning it into machines to further the agenda of
          >> scientism- results in pain
          >> and misery on a level entirely different form that
          >> of the christian
          >> inquisition. The oppression is invisible; that is,
          >> of course, until one turns
          >> on the television, converses with a coworker, or
          >> connects to the internet.
          >> What I hope to have related in this response, is
          >> that the criticism of
          >> religion, at this point in history, is entirely too
          >> safe. While any given
          >> interpretation of Truth warrants a good
          >> re-examination, it seems that the
          >> motives of such examinations are, at best, shady in
          >> the hands of one
          >> subscribing to a dominant interpretation.
          >> regards,
          >> John
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >> From The Exist List...
          >> http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist
          >>
          >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
          >> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          >>
          >>
          >
          >
          >__________________________________________________
          >Do You Yahoo!?
          >Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
          >http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
          >


          Get 250 color business cards for FREE! at Lycos Mail
          http://mail.lycos.com/freemail/vistaprint_index.html
        • Edward Alf
          Dustin, but that is all there is ... love is the way that we respond to others and ultimately it is only the manner in which the brain operates ... i dont see
          Message 4 of 8 , Mar 5, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            Dustin,

            but that is all there is ... love is the way that we respond to others and
            ultimately it is only the manner in which the brain operates ... i dont see
            it as pathetic ... the word would perhaps be "realistic" ... it does not
            change anything to realise how our brain operates ... love still remains as
            love ... people used to think that thunder was sent by the gods ... but now
            that we know it is only a matter of lightning superheating the air, does
            that change our awe at hearing it crash during a storm ... does a rainbow
            lose its beauty because we know it is due to refraction of sunlight ...

            what we feel and the way in which we interconnect with the world is all the
            result of brain processing ... this does not change anything ... only to
            make us more aware of who we are ...

            regards

            eduard

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Dustin Pickering" <dowotjon@...>
            To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2001 8:16 PM
            Subject: Re: [existlist] neurons firing: part 2


            > I agree here. I read an article once that broke love
            > down into chemical responses in the brain...I found it
            > awfully pathetic.
            >
            >
            >
            > --- jser1692 <jser1692@...> wrote:
            > > I forgot to address this part of the post in my
            > > response; I appologize.
            > >
            > > >where we have run into a problem is that we might
            > > wish to
            > > >force others to have the same interpretation and
            > > this leads to inquisitions
            > > >and burnings on the cross ...
            > >
            > > Indeed, the forcing of one's interpretation on
            > > others is the ultimate problem.
            > > I hold neither religion nor science as the bearer
            > > of Truth. Inquisitions and
            > > burnings on the cross demonstrate the hiddeous
            > > excesses of forcing upon others
            > > the christian interpretation of Truth. While it
            > > would be ignorant to believe
            > > that such things no longer happen, it would be
            > > unrealistic to believe that
            > > they happen with equal consistency, on an equal
            > > scale as such in past times.
            > > Further, such oppressive tendencies, though
            > > tragically powerful, present a
            > > clear front for resistance. Now, would it be
            > > misguided to say that science,
            > > once entirely threatened by religion, now holds the
            > > higher ground - at least
            > > in western society? Personally, I see christianity
            > > taking a back seat to the
            > > findings of this study, that survey, this finding,
            > > etc, concerning the means
            > > for directing one's life. The inherent dangers in a
            > > culture dominated by
            > > scientific (more accurately, scientism) processes,
            > > are founded in my prior
            > > post. Reducing a thinking, feeling, and vulnerable
            > > being to neurons
            > > firing-and all of those other "workings" that do
            > > little for humanity, save
            > > turning it into machines to further the agenda of
            > > scientism- results in pain
            > > and misery on a level entirely different form that
            > > of the christian
            > > inquisition. The oppression is invisible; that is,
            > > of course, until one turns
            > > on the television, converses with a coworker, or
            > > connects to the internet.
            > > What I hope to have related in this response, is
            > > that the criticism of
            > > religion, at this point in history, is entirely too
            > > safe. While any given
            > > interpretation of Truth warrants a good
            > > re-examination, it seems that the
            > > motives of such examinations are, at best, shady in
            > > the hands of one
            > > subscribing to a dominant interpretation.
            > > regards,
            > > John
          • Edward Alf
            Paul, if we are aware that the brain processes information by means of chemical signals, how does that result in dismissing the benefits of religious life? ...
            Message 5 of 8 , Mar 5, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              Paul,

              if we are aware that the brain processes information by means of chemical
              signals, how does that result in dismissing the benefits of religious life?
              ...

              a "neurosis" is a mental or emotional disorder ... that was not my meaning
              ... how do you come to the conclusion that, simply saying that the brain
              tends towards spirituality and the processing is by chemical signals,
              implies a neurosis ...

              i can see i have opened up a controversy here ...

              regards

              eduard

              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "Paul R Turner" <paulturner@...>
              To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 2:38 PM
              Subject: Re: [existlist] neurons firing: part 2


              > When we reduce human actions and emotions to scientific explanation we
              risk the parochial view of the 'genetic fallacy', as Freud did in his
              analysis of religion.
              >
              > By concluding religion was symptomatic of a neurosis it became easy to
              dismiss the benefits of a religious life (though I am an atheist).
              >
              > Regards
              >
              > Paul
              >
            • Edward Alf
              Paul, i would agree with what you are saying in regard to the dangers ... but then there are dangers whether this be from reductionism or non-reductionism ...
              Message 6 of 8 , Mar 6, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                Paul,

                i would agree with what you are saying in regard to the dangers ... but then
                there are dangers whether this be from reductionism or non-reductionism ...
                religion (if one could refer to this as wholistic) has been responsible for
                a tremendous amount of torment ... i find it difficult to read the bible
                because of all the killing that is in it ... that is not to excuse science
                which has merely made killing more efficient ...

                the danger that lies within any system of thought is that someone may apply
                it for his/her own purposes ...

                however, all of that does not to say that we should ignore the simple fact
                that the brain operates through the means of neurons ... that is not
                reductionism in itself ... it all depends upon how you treat the brain from
                that starting point ... it would be reductionism if one were to try to
                analyse each thought down to the firings of single neurons ... but a true
                understanding of our thinking process requires that we look at it from the
                point of view of combinations ... if a set of neurons are dedicated to
                identifying vertical or horizontal lines, this does not help in
                understanding how the brain can recognize a chair ... a lot more is going on
                ... the signals also must be "tagged" with other thoughts such as ones
                previous experience with chairs ...

                what i was trying to point out was that the human brain may be "wired for
                spirituality" ... that there is an inherent need for spirituality which is
                not obtained through learning ... it is already there (in our genes, so to
                speak) ... if this true ... and i would suggest that it is ... then how do
                we deal with existentialism? ... does existentialism satisfy the need for
                spirituality? ... im not sure of this point ... on one hand i find it
                intellectually satisfying, yet im still inclined to search for some form of
                god/deity ... with little success to date ... to put the question another
                way, can existentialism be taken as a religion, or is it only a philosophy
                ...

                regards

                eduard

                ----- Original Message -----
                From: "Paul R Turner" <paulturner@...>
                To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 9:41 AM
                Subject: Re: [existlist] neurons firing: part 2


                >
                > Edward
                >
                > You missed my point. I was not suggesting that religion is a neurosis from
                the use of science merely pointing out the inherent dangers (which Freud
                fell into) in using scientific evidence (which is not what I'm suggesting
                you have done) to describe human action. My point was that scientific
                evidence is a form of reductionism just ONE example of many is
                psychoanalysis, which reduces actions, speech etc to the unconscious
                disregarding the workings of cognitive processes.Sometimes we can benefit
                greatly if we resist the 'atomism' of science, the desire to reduce
                everything to its small constituent.
                >
                > Regards
                >
                > Paul
              • Paul R Turner
                Edward You missed my point. I was not suggesting that religion is a neurosis from the use of science merely pointing out the inherent dangers (which Freud fell
                Message 7 of 8 , Mar 6, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  Edward

                  You missed my point. I was not suggesting that religion is a neurosis from the use of science merely pointing out the inherent dangers (which Freud fell into) in using scientific evidence (which is not what I'm suggesting you have done) to describe human action. My point was that scientific evidence is a form of reductionism just ONE example of many is psychoanalysis, which reduces actions, speech etc to the unconscious disregarding the workings of cognitive processes.Sometimes we can benefit greatly if we resist the 'atomism' of science, the desire to reduce everything to its small constituent.

                  Regards

                  Paul
                  --

                  On Mon, 5 Mar 2001 22:18:47
                  Edward Alf wrote:
                  >Paul,
                  >
                  >if we are aware that the brain processes information by means of chemical
                  >signals, how does that result in dismissing the benefits of religious life?
                  >...
                  >
                  >a "neurosis" is a mental or emotional disorder ... that was not my meaning
                  >... how do you come to the conclusion that, simply saying that the brain
                  >tends towards spirituality and the processing is by chemical signals,
                  >implies a neurosis ...
                  >
                  >i can see i have opened up a controversy here ...
                  >
                  >regards
                  >
                  >eduard
                  >
                  >----- Original Message -----
                  >From: "Paul R Turner" <paulturner@...>
                  >To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
                  >Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 2:38 PM
                  >Subject: Re: [existlist] neurons firing: part 2
                  >
                  >
                  >> When we reduce human actions and emotions to scientific explanation we
                  >risk the parochial view of the 'genetic fallacy', as Freud did in his
                  >analysis of religion.
                  >>
                  >> By concluding religion was symptomatic of a neurosis it became easy to
                  >dismiss the benefits of a religious life (though I am an atheist).
                  >>
                  >> Regards
                  >>
                  >> Paul
                  >>
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >


                  Get 250 color business cards for FREE! at Lycos Mail
                  http://mail.lycos.com/freemail/vistaprint_index.html
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.