Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
I said that there are neurological indices for an inbuilt desire to believe or secular, and the triangle experiment: an obvious difference in people to anthropomorphise or not do so when observing a culture-free, value-neutral-neutral stimulus.
|
Right, hold on. I must confess I have not got a shred of a whisker of a clue as to exactly what you are on about here. what is a value-neutral-neutral stimulus? it reads sort of :
there are levels of brain (activity?) to either think 0 or 1 , the triangle experiment - (you mean an experiment to see if a few random numbers add up to either an acute or obtuse triangle or not? or do you mean the technological triangle experiment, which is a collaboration and staff exchange of scientific establishments in europe? or maybe even
http://thechurch.co.nz/inspiration/2010/12/triangle-experiment-1/?)
an obvious difference in people to project human thoughts and actions or not when looking at culture-free... ? I'm sorry but that just sounds like gibberish.
maybe is a language thing?
"He who has a Why to live for, can bear almost every How." I can understand him feeling that. typically people who go through intense mental/physical pressure or trauma are more open to these ideas, especially at their weakest point. You could also say "He who has a why to die for, can bear almost any life"
enough off topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
That is too generalistic. Being divise regarding the difference of humanism and Nazism hardly discourages ethical behavior when you defenbd the psoition of humanism, and beinbg inclusive regarding totalitarian ideoloigies when it comes to your willingness to be tolerant will not do you any good, but will destroy first your ideal of tolerance and next yourself.
|
I mean being inclusive on a human level. To not exclude people. Ethics must be at least in part learned via human interaction within a social group, and the broader the group the greater the sensitivity to broader ethical concerns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
What you mean, is probably this, which I find best expressed in the Kalamas Sutra from the Buddhist canon:
Do not put faith in traditions, even though they have been accepted for long generations and in many countries. Do not believe a thing because many repeat it. Do not accept a thing on the authority of one or another of the sages of old, nor on the ground of statements as found in the books. Never believe anything because probability is in its favour. Do not believe in that which you yourselves have imagined, thinking that a god has inspired it. Believe nothing merely on the authority of the teachers or the priests. After examination, believe that which you have tested for yourself and found reasonable, which is in conformity with your well being and that of others.
|
Yeah thats a lovely quote. I would still say, about the probability thing that if the odds are so staggeringly loaded in one direction, you can pretty much rely on it. I'm willing to take the risk anyway.