Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
coberst

What are we afraid of?

28 posts in this topic

What are we afraid of?

Humans are pattern recognition creatures. We survive by the patterns of which we are conscious. Math is the science pattern; we use it constantly to explore the deepest core of nature’s pattern. To be an enlightened citizen is to be a citizen who has rationally organized a matrix of pattern detecting systems.

We have in our genes some pattern detecting systems. When hiking in the woods I am occasionally stopped in my tracks with a deep chill by some kind of form or movement. Among this infinity of movement and pattern one particular set penetrates my consciousness. We have evolved with this detection system so as to survive the predators.

Artifacts have replaced tigers and bears. Our predators were once tigers and bears but today they are humans and artifacts (something created by humans).

A steady diet of Twinkies and chips leads to a fat gut; a steady diet of sound bites and bumper stickers leads to a fat head!

Knowing is like day breaking, understanding is like lightening striking.

Comprehension is the payoff for struggle. There is a hierarchy of comprehension. Like a pyramid with the base being awareness, followed by consciousness (awareness plus attention) then comes knowledge with understanding at the pinnacle of the pyramid.

We are meaning creating creatures; we constantly create things in which we place value. We create various ideologies such as nations, religions, political parties, economic theories, and we create wars, new technologies, cars, cell phones, shopping malls, bombs, complex financial systems, etc. Many of our creations are too complex and their effects are far beyond our ability to comprehend and to control. If we do not become more intellectually sophisticated our artifacts will destroy us.

Reading is the key to knowing and essay writing is the canvas for creating understanding.

Of all the creatures perhaps humans are the only ones who fail to live up to their potential. Obesity is the evidence of a lack of physical endeavor and boredom is the consequence of an apathetic and lazy brain.

Reading is fundamental. Writing is the art and science of creation.

We can take any policy issue that might enrage any one of us and we can discover that the root cause of it is the fact that we the citizens are not doing our job. In a liberal democracy wherein the sovereignty rests on the shoulders of the citizen any outrage committed by that society can ultimately be traced back to the lack of enlightenment by the citizen.

Enlightened does not equal informed. Information flows over us in a daily deluge but consciousness is the missing catalyst for action. Our daily dose of information might be compared to our drive to work each morning. We are deluged with information reaching our perception on our drive to work and very little of that information becomes an object of consciousness.

I think that if we make the intellectual effort to understand some domain of knowledge and perhaps take the additional effort to write out our understanding of that matter, our essay will serve as our pattern for recognition for matters pertinent to that domain.

I consider that writing an essay is a major means for reaching an understanding of a domain of knowledge.

I think that these forums offer a great opportunity for practicing our writing skills. Do you agree? Is writing in your wallet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice post. As to the fears part, i was reading that many fears, particularly phobias, are created in childhood. Inherently, humans do not need to fear anything, but unfortunately, like many things, fear is a learned response. The good news is that, using modern psychology and science, all phobias can be overcome . Also humans can be taught how not to fear.

Fear has an evolutionary purpose, but it is often counter intuitive for a sapient being. Sapience produces a range of processes and responses which are much more productive and survival oriented than simple fear.

I enjoyed the rest of your post and agreed with much of it, but i think you are a bit hard on people. Learning to think effectively is a complex process. it requires a well functioning brain without damage or induced effects which diminish capacity.

It also requires a huge accumulated data base of knowledge to make the most of effective thought processes. But the main stumbling block is in recognising the complex organic and learned factors which allow and encourage effective thinking.

Not only do we need to understand memory, to utilise it effectively, we should understand the significance of symbolism and the historical development of sapience/intelligence.

Finally we have to be taught to think using multiple intelligences. True logical/rational thought has only been recognised and developed late in mans evolution. Philosphical thought even later. Emotional/intuitive reasoning is perhaps the oldest form of thought/intelligence, and spiritual reasoning, using known qualities of the human mind to infer knowledge about our external environment and to categorise knowledge about ourselves is at least as old as the development of true sapience in humanity.

Thus, to think effectively we need to know, recognise, understand and be able to control / manipulate our thought processes, using all theses intelligences. Further, to be completely effective, we need to be able to consciously contact our subconscious and be able to recognise it and control /manipulate our subconscious mind as much as our conscious one. Very few humans ever fully achieve this. Most never even begin the voyage of discovery.

However, i agree with you ,that reading and writing are twin core processes, essential for effective thinking. Essay writing helps in organising and processing data, but many other forms also need to be mastered for different purposes. Even then, communication is limited by the misunderstanding and misapplication of words, and the concepts and symbols attached to words. Thus, one person's words and meanings can appear completely different to a second person who speaks the same language, but has different ways of attaching concepts and symbols to words.

I did enjoy your post :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr Walker

I think that most normal humans have the ability to learn CT (Critical Thinking). I wish that our American school system taught our students not just what to think but how to think.

CT is an acronym for Critical Thinking. Everybody considers themselves to be a critical thinker. That is why we need to differentiate among different levels of critical thinking.

Most people fall in the category that I call Reagan thinkers—trust but verify. Then there are those who have taken the basic college course taught by the philosophy dept that I call Logic 101. This is a credit course that teaches the basic principles of reasoning. Of course, a person need not take the college course and can learn the matter on their own effort, but I suspect few do that.

The third level I call CT (Critical Thinking). CT includes the knowledge of Logic 101 and also the knowledge that focuses upon the intellectual character and attitude of critical thinking. It includes knowledge regarding the ego and social centric forces that impede rational thinking.

Most decisions we have to make are judgment calls. A judgment call is made when we must make a decision when there is no “true” or “false” answers. When we make a judgment call our decision is bad, good, or better.

Many factors are involved: there are the available facts, assumptions, skills, knowledge, and especially personal experience and attitude. I think that the two most important elements in the mix are personal experience and attitude.

When we study math we learn how to use various algorithms to facilitate our skill in dealing with quantities. If we never studied math we could deal with quantity on a primary level but our quantifying ability would be minimal. Likewise with making judgments; if we study the art and science of good judgment we can make better decisions and if we never study the art and science of judgment our decision ability will remain minimal.

I am convinced that a fundamental problem we have in this country (USA) is that our citizens have never learned the art and science of good judgment. Before the recent introduction of CT into our schools and colleges our young people have been taught primarily what to think and not how to think. All of us graduated with insufficient comprehension of the knowledge, skills, and attitude necessary for the formulation of good judgment. The result of this inability to make good judgment is evident and is dangerous.

I am primarily interested in the judgment that adults exercise in regard to public issues. Of course, any improvement in judgment generally will affect both personal and community matters.

To put the matter into a nut shell:

1. Normal men and women can significantly improve their ability to make judgments.

2. CT is the domain of knowledge that delineates the knowledge, skills, and intellectual character demanded for good judgment.

3. CT has been introduced into our schools and colleges slowly in the last two or three decades.

4. Few of today’s adults were ever taught CT.

5. I suspect that at least another two generations will pass before our society reaps significant rewards resulting from teaching CT to our children.

6. Can our democracy survive that long?

7. I think that every effort must be made to convince today’s adults that they need to study and learn CT on their own. I am not suggesting that adults find a teacher but I am suggesting that adults become self-actualizing learners.

8. I am convinced that learning the art and science of Critical Thinking is an important step toward becoming a better citizen in today’s democratic society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

There was a Personality Theorist in the 70s (her name escapes me) She postulated the conclusion that during the days of Abraham and Moses mankind did not really have good communication skills between the

Hemispheres of the Brain. This being a factor in why they heard the voice of God. She was not arguing that God did not exist, rather that this lack of capacity which today is the norm hampered mankind and so

therefore they heard voices which were applicable as a favorable quality as it aided survival. Things like for example the Magna Carta represent a change in perhaps how we reacted to problems. We are at this point now and yes a lot of garbage in, garbage out but clouded from the context of entertainment is going on, what we need to come to terms with is that we are all holding the batton.

.

Any thoughts?

Edited by Triad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do y'all remember 'Kung Fu?' You know, 'Grasshopper, take the pebble from my hand.' David Carradine, he was my hero when I was a kid.

What scares me is that a man 72 years old who was my hero might have developed a mind that would allow such a thought to enter that would lead me to commit an act that would wipe me out of the program of this world.

They discovered David Carradine in a Thailand hotel closet yesterday morning dead of an apparent asphyxiation after a probable sex act went wrong. Scary.

This is SHOCKING!

LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- David Carradine's wife and his manager disputed suggestions that the actor's death was a suicide, while rescue workers and police in Bangkok, Thailand, said the actor's neck and genitals were found bound with rope.

David Carradine was the star of the 1970s TV series, "Kung Fu," and appeared in more than 100 films.

David Carradine was the star of the 1970s TV series, "Kung Fu," and appeared in more than 100 films.

more photos »

Carradine, 72, became famous in the 1970s, when he portrayed the traveling Shaolin monk Kwai Chang Caine in the television series "Kung Fu."

Bangkok police said Carradine was found hanging by a nylon rope in a Bangkok hotel room closet Thursday morning.

A member of the emergency crew who was called to the hotel after a maid found Carradine told CNN that a yellow nylon rope was tied around the actor's neck and a black rope was around his genitals. Police later confirmed that information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Triad is waving the baton to direct the dirge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There was a Personality Theorist in the 70s (her name escapes me) She postulated the conclusion that during the days of Abraham and Moses mankind did not really have good communication skills between the

Hemispheres of the Brain. This being a factor in why they heard the voice of God. She was not arguing that God did not exist, rather that this lack of capacity which today is the norm hampered mankind and so

therefore they heard voices which were applicable as a favorable quality as it aided survival. Things like for example the Magna Carta represent a change in perhaps how we reacted to problems. We are at this point now and yes a lot of garbage in, garbage out but clouded from the context of entertainment is going on, what we need to come to terms with is that we are all holding the batton.

.

Any thoughts?

I very much doubt that either evolutioary theory or that of cognitive development would allow for such a major development, organicaly or in processing, so late in human evolution. I suspect that cromagnon men thought just as modern men do, and had brains with almost identical organic and processing ability.

Two identifiable differences with modern man is that we have a much larger pooled, and thus individual, data base of knowledge( ie children learn what the sun is and basically what gravity is almost from birth via the assumptions and knowlege of those around them.)

We have also recognised how brains work and actually learned how to teach and use systems of thought which utilise various aspects of sapience. One such is logical thinking , another formal form is philosophy, while music and mathematics offer other strategies for identifying patterns etc.

Through evolutionary thinking and biology we can see, understand, and utilise or counteract the environmental and biological imperatives which fundamentally drive us as a species and for so long ruled our decision making processes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thought: Adam and Eve did not meld properly. :D

You notice all the inner planets have comet-holes all over them like they were semi-solid planets at one time. Look at a photo of Mars. You can even see how the surface just flowed like lava. Lovers just flow together into a mold; they meld.

One of my distant relatives, maybe a cousin, Margaret Mead was an Anthropologist and sociologist.

And so, as Mead herself described the goal of her research: "I have tried to answer the question which sent me to Samoa: Are the disturbances which vex our adolescents due to the nature of adolescence itself or to the civilization? Under different conditions does adolescence present a different picture?"

She noticed in her research that other cultures were not as afraid as we are in the US. We are Constrained and Restrained at the same time. We are being forced back from something that we have not gotten to yet. Laws have been made to prohibit you from doing something that you would not do in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I very much doubt that either evolutioary theory or that of cognitive development would allow for such a major development, organicaly or in processing, so late in human evolution. I suspect that cromagnon men thought just as modern men do, and had brains with almost identical organic and processing ability.

Two identifiable differences with modern man is that we have a much larger pooled, and thus individual, data base of knowledge( ie children learn what the sun is and basically what gravity is almost from birth via the assumptions and knowlege of those around them.)

We have also recognised how brains work and actually learned how to teach and use systems of thought which utilise various aspects of sapience. One such is logical thinking , another formal form is philosophy, while music and mathematics offer other strategies for identifying patterns etc.

Through evolutionary thinking and biology we can see, understand, and utilise or counteract the environmental and biological imperatives which fundamentally drive us as a species and for so long ruled our decision making processes.

Our inherent decision making process involve the collection and maintenance of women (no offence ladies :innocent: ) and given today's style of living in the free world; lets face it we all want to be James Bond (we even have presented a significant amount of female equivalents and to be specific that is related to war). If Cro-Magnon thought as well as we did human life would not have the value it has today (I feel). I mean that in the old west (North American United States in the 1800's there really was a guy who killed another guy for snoring and he got away with it). Personally I would like to feel in respect to absolutes that mankind has not evolved with respect to recent history but specifically what examples would you like to provide?

Any thoughts?

PS:Puctuated Equalibrium can potentially explain somethings but to everything???

Edited by Triad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker

I think that most normal humans have the ability to learn CT (Critical Thinking). I wish that our American school system taught our students not just what to think but how to think.

CT is an acronym for Critical Thinking. Everybody considers themselves to be a critical thinker. That is why we need to differentiate among different levels of critical thinking.

Most people fall in the category that I call Reagan thinkers—trust but verify. Then there are those who have taken the basic college course taught by the philosophy dept that I call Logic 101. This is a credit course that teaches the basic principles of reasoning. Of course, a person need not take the college course and can learn the matter on their own effort, but I suspect few do that.

The third level I call CT (Critical Thinking). CT includes the knowledge of Logic 101 and also the knowledge that focuses upon the intellectual character and attitude of critical thinking. It includes knowledge regarding the ego and social centric forces that impede rational thinking.

Most decisions we have to make are judgment calls. A judgment call is made when we must make a decision when there is no "true" or "false" answers. When we make a judgment call our decision is bad, good, or better.

Many factors are involved: there are the available facts, assumptions, skills, knowledge, and especially personal experience and attitude. I think that the two most important elements in the mix are personal experience and attitude.

When we study math we learn how to use various algorithms to facilitate our skill in dealing with quantities. If we never studied math we could deal with quantity on a primary level but our quantifying ability would be minimal. Likewise with making judgments; if we study the art and science of good judgment we can make better decisions and if we never study the art and science of judgment our decision ability will remain minimal.

I am convinced that a fundamental problem we have in this country (USA) is that our citizens have never learned the art and science of good judgment. Before the recent introduction of CT into our schools and colleges our young people have been taught primarily what to think and not how to think. All of us graduated with insufficient comprehension of the knowledge, skills, and attitude necessary for the formulation of good judgment. The result of this inability to make good judgment is evident and is dangerous.

I am primarily interested in the judgment that adults exercise in regard to public issues. Of course, any improvement in judgment generally will affect both personal and community matters.

To put the matter into a nut shell:

1. Normal men and women can significantly improve their ability to make judgments.

2. CT is the domain of knowledge that delineates the knowledge, skills, and intellectual character demanded for good judgment.

3. CT has been introduced into our schools and colleges slowly in the last two or three decades.

4. Few of today's adults were ever taught CT.

5. I suspect that at least another two generations will pass before our society reaps significant rewards resulting from teaching CT to our children.

6. Can our democracy survive that long?

7. I think that every effort must be made to convince today's adults that they need to study and learn CT on their own. I am not suggesting that adults find a teacher but I am suggesting that adults become self-actualizing learners.

8. I am convinced that learning the art and science of Critical Thinking is an important step toward becoming a better citizen in today's democratic society.

excellent post... :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been studying such things as our dread of death and how we repress this subject of our mortality because it causes us great anxiety.

In my effort to comprehend what this anxiety might be in its raw form I have constructed what I think might be useful in that understanding.

Suppose that we were placed on a platform high above the ground and were required to live there. And suppose that there were no guard rails on the boundary of the platform.

Do you think that this might be a useful imagination to help us understand these matters?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A very valid threat exists to life in that circumstance I mean given how much movement is evident in sleep studies.

In my case (I means as an example) being forced to deal with that :angry2:

Any thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Communication is the key to future as you always no it and so this forum gives us a lot of interaction through writing and every forms of human knowledge

Scientifically our knoewldge databse is opened immediately to make quick decesion which is directly being influenced by our brain which enable our extra domian knowledge and why we have been classified as humans

Thanks

B???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Our inherent decision making process involve the collection and maintenance of women (no offence ladies :innocent: ) and given today's style of living in the free world; lets face it we all want to be James Bond (we even have presented a significant amount of female equivalents and to be specific that is related to war). If Cro-Magnon thought as well as we did human life would not have the value it has today (I feel). I mean that in the old west (North American United States in the 1800's there really was a guy who killed another guy for snoring and he got away with it). Personally I would like to feel in respect to absolutes that mankind has not evolved with respect to recent history but specifically what examples would you like to provide?

Any thoughts?

PS:Puctuated Equalibrium can potentially explain somethings but to everything???

Im not at all sure i have a clue what you are talking about there.

Men today are biologically driven exactly the same as cromagnon men. Thus their basic drives towards women are the same. Society creates a set of social constructs and expectations which delineate how men should treat women. Men are taught these social constructs and expectations. Then men must decide whether to follow them, or resort to more primitive drives, attitudes, and instincts.

A mans choice will be driven /informed by many things, from his own genetics, through to how his own father treated women. It will have regard to his wider ethics/morality, and how far he is constrained by either public opinion or law.

Nothing has changed since cromagnon times, except for our knowledge /data bases, both public and private, which inform our decision making. Thus we treat women differently now, not because we are innately any better or more moral beings, but because, while exactly the same beings, our inner and outer environmental stimuli (and restraints) have changed We have personal and social knowledge which cromagnon man did not have. That knowledge largely(but not always) impells us to make different decisions.

Social knowledge includes religious teachings, manners and etiquette/social expectations, along with a more informed knowledge of human biology and biological responses. Thus a modern man has many more productive responses open to him in his approach to a woman, than the cromagnon man did.

Personal knowledge involves the processing of social knowledge in many ways, from logic to emotional reflection, to make better /more successful and educated decisions, and create internalised values, ethics, and moralities, which inform how we choose to interact with the outside universe

Some men find this confusing, others very empowering and liberating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I very much doubt that either evolutioary theory or that of cognitive development would allow for such a major development, organicaly or in processing, so late in human evolution. I suspect that cromagnon men thought just as modern men do, and had brains with almost identical organic and processing ability.

Two identifiable differences with modern man is that we have a much larger pooled, and thus individual, data base of knowledge( ie children learn what the sun is and basically what gravity is almost from birth via the assumptions and knowlege of those around them.)

We have also recognised how brains work and actually learned how to teach and use systems of thought which utilise various aspects of sapience. One such is logical thinking , another formal form is philosophy, while music and mathematics offer other strategies for identifying patterns etc.

Through evolutionary thinking and biology we can see, understand, and utilise or counteract the environmental and biological imperatives which fundamentally drive us as a species and for so long ruled our decision making processes.

We have no other choice but to follow the direction of past decisions. That, in my view, is not evolution, but adaptation. Evolution is system-wide. Just the gaining of knowledge is not a signal of anything but the duration of time and the ability to use the environment. Mankind of whatever kind has always had the ability to use the environment the way they do now, the environment had to evolve. It had to be built to match the ability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every so often these movies come out like "death race" presenting a TV show in which the goal is to kill the completion. The idea today of a real TV show where the point is to murder your opponent is absurd these days but from the context of pure fiction. Violence for its own sake has or is in the process of loosing its appeal excuses need to be made and even in the case of war the commentary "we are doing this to get control of more land and slaves has seemingly failed to form armies (had that not been the case then why has so much emphasis been placed on religions to justify wars). When it comes to learned behavior the idea that we learned to be more moral does not quite, "cut the mustard" if you can understand what I am saying. In that context I feel that it is at least possible that some evolutionary change may have played a role.

The only thing that impeded King David from killing one of his own soldiers because he wanted that soldiers wife was God, now that would be a different story.

Any thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The only thing that impeded King David from killing one of his own soldiers because he wanted that soldiers wife was God, now that would be a different story.

Thing about that is, the thought of having the wife by David is what killed the soldier. In order for the realm to be supplied, the soldier had to be killed. David sent the soldier to die because he wanted the wife and God said 'Yes.' But, that is another story.

And that is what scares me from doing anything.

Edited by greggK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

greggK that story clearly shows God punishes David for his behavior.

Any thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

greggK that story clearly shows God punishes David for his behavior.

Any thoughts?

Yes, I guess that shows something. Which wife of David did the line of the Saviour come from?

What (sorry, Which) woman produced Solomon?

Edited by greggK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

If memory serves the line they followed was the Men but I am not really a scholar of the bible. Went to Catholic and Lutheran Schools as a young man and so I some background but I am also left handed which, seems for me to mean, I do remember faces better than names.. :yes:

Given that example though (as well as other's) I feel man has changed substantially in recent history in respect to morality.

Any thoughts?

Edited by Triad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If memory serves the line they followed was the Men but I am not really a scholar of the bible. Went to Catholic and Lutheran Schools as a young man and so I some background but I am also left handed which, seems for me to mean, I do remember faces better than names.. :yes:

Given that example though (as well as other's) I feel man has changed substantially in recent history.

Any thoughts?

Yes, man has changed inwardly which has changed the appearance somewhat which may have caused an adaptation because of the woman shaving her legs and underarms and man shaving his beard. Maybe we are so scared of the outside because it is so ugly and so dirty.

If you are left-handed I guess you would be more of a right-brain thinker. If you are left-handed and female, you would be strictly right-brain. Man is a left-brain creature. I think a left-handed man looks at the situation in a strict logic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I feel that from the context of the majority of mans past, having been spent in the wild? The benefits of how we as members of society have, compensates. Nature shows are often very stunning, but life in the wild limits the life spans of wild animals simply because of how nature operates.

The last thing on a tigers mind to find his mother at a time when she is old and unable to hunt for herself.

Any thoughts?

PS: Another example in respect to how people have changed would cite the fall of Jericho in the Holy Bible..

Edited by Triad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Man has been 'in' the wild all of his history. And that does bring out domestication. The cats, the dogs, the horses, the sheeple, haha ; Nature is so stunning because it mimics the rainbow.

What color are we?

Edited by greggK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

We have no other choice but to follow the direction of past decisions. That, in my view, is not evolution, but adaptation. Evolution is system-wide. Just the gaining of knowledge is not a signal of anything but the duration of time and the ability to use the environment. Mankind of whatever kind has always had the ability to use the environment the way they do now, the environment had to evolve. It had to be built to match the ability.

i disagree(if i have understood you correctly) Mankind is not constrained by anything. We have unlimited choice. This is the gift/curse of sapience. Humans can use imagination, creativity hypothesis, algorithims, extrapolation and many other methods of thought to ;create a myriad of alternatives, explore the consequences of each one ,and use a variety of value positions to decide which are the most favourable, and why.

All humans are inherently capable of thinking this way to some extent, but they need to be taught to do so. Some are more gifted than others in certain elements of thought, and in total, but all can contribute.

Human sapience is built on not just data/knowledge but on the abilities of self aware consciousness/sapience itself. Sapience creates a "critical mass"or pivot point which effectively ends the dominance of evolution and creates a new order of potentialities in the universe. Outside of sapient beings the universe has grow in response to evolution. Biological, genetic, and environmental imperatives (among other things) drive, shape and form it. Once sapience is introduced into the mix, however, the potentialiies increase explosively, and the universe is no longer running to a "natural"order but to one directed by sapience.

(Im not talking about god here, but about humanity and other sapient beings if they exist.) Potentially, humans will control gravity, alter their own genetic composition shape and form, extend life indefinitely,create worm holes, and alter the very fabric of the universe, transmuting and transmitting matter and energy We wil build/transform future environments to suit us, and we will rebuild ourselves to suit the environment ,where that is more effective.

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that humans are very complex and have the potential to become even more complex. But in truth we have two hemispheres and in and around the same time there leaders started lying to there populace in order to achieve military goals. This of course without any clear and apparent cross cultural communication up until about 500 years ago. I mean there are religious icons and if perhaps you’re suggesting they are the source of that learned behavior? Our leadership did everything possible to maintain whatever misconceptions they had about the value of life mankind has continued and dealt with the problems within the limits of life-spans.

Perhaps there have changes with respect to natural selection, in the days of perhaps the Roman Empire (or equivalents in other parts of the world) Sociopaths would have made for important fodder. Despite that inclination upon the part of those then in power they had to manipulate us, in order for us to engage in the same behavior. All I am saying is that suggest it is possible that mankind experienced a potential favorable mutation, focusing more on there families (and realizing that there enemies have families as well). And you know what Mr. Walker even taking recent events into consideration there are no actual executions being made public today and all one has to distinguish is blood flow from a living or dead person (very little actually if your dead).

So even the enemy of the United States realizes that such a show would do them no good.

Constantinople was Vatican One which ended in the 1820s; Vatican Two is the authority in the Vatican since then and at present.

It is a dramatic change taking all things into consideration.

I am certain that before man's evolution is complete the technology we develop will seem incredible but it is also possible that we are more sophisticated than that. It is possible that in such a complete form technology as we are capable of comprehending it will be unnecessary.

Any thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.