Some thoughts on beliefs, progressives, and conservatives r
Moderator: Super Moderators
Originally posted by HB3
Not immoral -- amoral.
Well, the idea is that they aren't. If we live in a universe governed by instincts and drives there can be no morality, ie, something that exists separately from those instincts and drives.
Well, a point is - 'we' are not solely propelled through 'instincts and drives' - as somewhere along the way - the idea of 'choice' happened. And this is just human scale. How could we even have the audacity to believe 'human scale' applies to the universe? Religion? Here I go again, picking on religion.
I understand. But when you say the "idea" of choice -- is this real, or an illusion? If it's just an illusion, then it doesn't make any difference. If that is real, then it changes everything. But when you say it appears at some point, well, such a notion does run contrary to religion, which states that it was there to begin with -- not a bug, but a feature, so to speak. Saying the idea appeared at some point, again, to me suggests an evolutionary development. If we're talking about the soul, though, that didn't evolve.
Originally posted by SquidInk
"... In order to bring about Kaku's type one, we need technology advancements, for sure. Is it possible that our level of philosophical maturity determines in large part the nature of our technological advances? If so, does economicus' philosophy get us to a type one?
To some degree this is true - that philosophical maturity determines the direction of some of the technological advances. However - certain other techonological advances (read scientific advances in particular) - have this humbling effect. 'Pure' science happens along a different, but related trajectory. I guess I am with the folks who believe - say, that quantum physics, will eventually reveal the essence of consciousness - leading to a leap in consciousness that will change everything.
Linnea wrote: To some degree this is true - that philosophical maturity determines the direction of some of the technological advances. However - certain other techonological advances (read scientific advances in particular) - have this humbling effect. 'Pure' science happens along a different, but related trajectory. I guess I am with the folks who believe - say, that quantum physics, will eventually reveal the essence of consciousness - leading to a leap in consciousness that will change everything.
Right, but on our current trajectory, the unchecked activities of economicus will lead to a technological singularity long before we make the quantum leap of consciousness.
Borg before Jedi, or something.
Last edited by SquidInk on 10-21-2009 12:26 AM, edited 1 time in total.
For if it profit, none dare call it Treason.
Originally posted by HB3
I understand. But when you say the "idea" of choice -- is this real, or an illusion? If it's just an illusion, then it doesn't make any difference. If that is real, then it changes everything. But when you say it appears at some point, well, such a notion does run contrary to religion, which states that it was there to begin with -- not a bug, but a feature, so to speak. Saying the idea appeared at some point, again, to me suggests an evolutionary development. If we're talking about the soul, though, that didn't evolve.
I can agree with much of this, except - that 'we' make choices (in human scale) and experience the consequences of choices. This in itself leads to an evolutionary 'progression', at least in terms of 'cultural heritage' and 'knowledge'. When you apply a little more angst - then you might get into the more ambitious framework of religion. Real or an Illusion in terms of what?
Originally posted by SquidInk
Right, but on our current trajectory, the unchecked activities of economicus will lead to a technological singularity long before we make the quantum leap of consciousness.
Borg before Jedi, or something.
Well, then - May the Force be with us - and I do mean that sincerely. We should not delay a sane re-organization along the lines of local community in any case. This needs to be a part of the process.
Linnea wrote: You know - some part of me feels so very damned silly - discussing all these things...
Ah, say it isn't so. You all got my neurons firing. Might not be a good thing
I do like the reference from a fine gentleman when he put it all in perspective by using Star wars and Star trek NG
--
Well then, I feel rather stunted just thinking about the fact that we are so small in the vastness of space. We could be it, the only sentient life. The lottery pick. God's only choice if you believe in that path.
There is such hate and waste of talent in the world today. It keeps us from moving forward.
When you think of the great minds of all time and how they were treated. How we treat one another today over mere words and not even over food or water. People are starving and have no shelter. I wish it would help give some perspective, but it doesn't. I wish we could just pool the gifts and talents we have and share them globally.
Never mind I'm just dreaming or I'm in a nightmare and waiting to awaken.
I agree with the local restructuring part, but we need to set up some global networking. If something ever goes wrong it would be important to have good relations internationally with the everyday working classes.
Someday in the future society is going to go back to smaller agrarian communities. My thought is something big will happen and the governments will not be able to handle it...
Wanted to get this up here, then - looking forward to reading your post, Vigo. 
Occurred to me, one of the questions raised was:
"Another question is (as we now see other mammals exhibit communal or cultural behavior) - what role did 'culture' have in this difference [choice points/'free will'] ? And, this question as well: (if it matters) what came first - the increasingly complex organizations of the brain - or the increasingly complex organization of our 'culture(s) which reached some critical mass'?"
...and we did not really comment on this. It is not a 'Darwinian' question in that it does not have a genetic origin. Or, in other words - 'natural selection' just got 'us' to a certain point - beyond which the continuity of culture carried us along (and not genetics) to the 'choice points' which carried us beyond instinctual behaviors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memetics
Seems I have clumsily stumbled into 'memetics' here. So, will back off from that. Might be something to consider at some point though - as far as hope for 'cultural change' leading the way toward the 'evolution of consciousness'. Which is the direction I was headed anyway.
*Just another 'point' of clarification here (of my 'point' of view - heh) Consiousness = Divine Consciousness.
Occurred to me, one of the questions raised was:
"Another question is (as we now see other mammals exhibit communal or cultural behavior) - what role did 'culture' have in this difference [choice points/'free will'] ? And, this question as well: (if it matters) what came first - the increasingly complex organizations of the brain - or the increasingly complex organization of our 'culture(s) which reached some critical mass'?"
...and we did not really comment on this. It is not a 'Darwinian' question in that it does not have a genetic origin. Or, in other words - 'natural selection' just got 'us' to a certain point - beyond which the continuity of culture carried us along (and not genetics) to the 'choice points' which carried us beyond instinctual behaviors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memetics
Seems I have clumsily stumbled into 'memetics' here. So, will back off from that. Might be something to consider at some point though - as far as hope for 'cultural change' leading the way toward the 'evolution of consciousness'. Which is the direction I was headed anyway.
*Just another 'point' of clarification here (of my 'point' of view - heh) Consiousness = Divine Consciousness.
Vigo - so glad you have weighed in here. It may be fanciful thinking on my part, but I think not. There is 'something' to this impulse (if you want to call it that) to return to the focus of local structure/communities - that goes beyond simply a survival mentality. Although that might be reason enough. I believe, for those who respond to this call, there is also an 'allowing' of a new consciousness along the lines of sanity and a new compassion - as well as resourcefulness.
"We are the world, we are the children'. But, I don't want to get all 'new agey', or 'new edgy' about it. In many ways - a quiet revolution of 'non-participation'. Not that quiet would mean insigificant. More in the way of no longer running behind what is going on with a sense of powerlessness and futility - and getting creative instead. There is much more power in hope, than despair.
Agree also with engaging globally. We have the means to do this now. I can log on to the internet right now - and order cloth that has been grown, harvested, spun and dyed - locally, by five women who have names and smiles - from somewhere in - I don't know - Africa? Australia? These niche markets and the people who populate them are accessible. Amazing, really. And of course, the larger groups and communities.
There is already much that is local that is already being organized all over the country. Local food, local energy, sustainability - getting away from dependence on the 'grid'. Keeping money invested locally, banking, even currencies in some areas. Small businesses. It's all there. The 'Y2K' experience, remember that? It got a focus going on community organizing and resources. This economic downturn is having a similar effect. New energies and technologies for sustainable living. Many things are already happening. Encouraging.
Also catch your sense though, of something big happening - and govt will drop the ball. Maybe it already has... Scary.
"We are the world, we are the children'. But, I don't want to get all 'new agey', or 'new edgy' about it. In many ways - a quiet revolution of 'non-participation'. Not that quiet would mean insigificant. More in the way of no longer running behind what is going on with a sense of powerlessness and futility - and getting creative instead. There is much more power in hope, than despair.
Agree also with engaging globally. We have the means to do this now. I can log on to the internet right now - and order cloth that has been grown, harvested, spun and dyed - locally, by five women who have names and smiles - from somewhere in - I don't know - Africa? Australia? These niche markets and the people who populate them are accessible. Amazing, really. And of course, the larger groups and communities.
There is already much that is local that is already being organized all over the country. Local food, local energy, sustainability - getting away from dependence on the 'grid'. Keeping money invested locally, banking, even currencies in some areas. Small businesses. It's all there. The 'Y2K' experience, remember that? It got a focus going on community organizing and resources. This economic downturn is having a similar effect. New energies and technologies for sustainable living. Many things are already happening. Encouraging.
Also catch your sense though, of something big happening - and govt will drop the ball. Maybe it already has... Scary.