psyche101 Posted March 21, 2018 #276 Share Posted March 21, 2018 8 minutes ago, nephili said: Love and mating are not even related. Love is an emotion. Mating is the act of reproduction. Love gives us the motivation to procreate and sustain the species, the majority prefer to have a partner to start a family with. It benefits the species. Part of the instincts that drive us to be top predator and why we are where we are today. They are certainly intimately related. When people partner up, sex is a given. Its not in the earlier stages where we seek out a mate, that's chance. Mating is essential, love processes the bond to maintain a working relationship that advantages procreation and therefore the species. Instinct. 8 minutes ago, nephili said: Because many people can't tell the difference in love and the primal urge to mate the heck out of someone. That's not explaining the couples whi break up after a decade or more of maintaining what you consider love, and that happens thousands if times every day. What your describing won't last more than 2 years. Sure that concept exists but love doesnt fix it. 8 minutes ago, nephili said: Also divorce is much more socially accepted now. Its like anything, it applies to a percentage of the population, it serves well for victims but more often it creates victims too. A balance, but not always in proportion by any means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Due Posted March 21, 2018 #277 Share Posted March 21, 2018 1 minute ago, psyche101 said: I don't give belief any special meaning, I give the real world, what we experience every day, what you can see hear and feel precedence over some personal fantasy for personal comfort. There are better explainations. Before we understood physics and biology it was the best answer we had and therefore more than acceptable, today we have bettered those early theories. It really is as simple as that. Hanging onto those early ideologies I feel illustrates the weakness of our development. No, you don't understand science and don't want to. That much is painfully obvious. You analogy not only fails, it's immature. But it's not an analogy. Belief in the evidence and proofs of science has provided an alternative to what, how, and why ancient worldviews or whatever you want to call it, were thought about in the past. But sometimes these days, it's taken too far. To be rigid or fanatical in belief is never good, whether it be one way or the other. Many point out how illogical it is to believe in the Bible literally. But what's the difference if someone claims that the evidences of science are infallible in basically the same way? The rigid interpretation of scientific evidence demands the denial of mind. But you can't do it because obviously, everyone has a mind. There's no real objective evidence that mind exists. In fact, scientists are working very hard to prove that the brain IS the mind. So until either they prove the brain IS the mind or prove it is something else; rigidly or fundamentally in the scientific sense, mind does not exist. But even you won't do it. Instead you tell me that I don't understand science when that's not what's being misunderstood. How (or perhaps why) people believe what they believe, is what's misunderstood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nephili Posted March 21, 2018 #278 Share Posted March 21, 2018 20 minutes ago, psyche101 said: Love gives us the motivation to procreate and sustain the species, the majority prefer to have a partner to start a family with. It benefits the species. Part of the instincts that drive us to be top predator and why we are where we are today. They are certainly intimately related. When people partner up, sex is a given. Its not in the earlier stages where we seek out a mate, that's chance. Mating is essential, love processes the bond to maintain a working relationship that advantages procreation and therefore the species. Instinct. I love my kids. I love my mother. I love my dad. I love my brothers. I love my best friend. They all give me an oxytocin buzz like you wouldn't believe. I don't want to mate with any of them. Love and mating are not related. 23 minutes ago, psyche101 said: That's not explaining the couples whi break up after a decade or more of maintaining what you consider love, and that happens thousands if times every day. What your describing won't last more than 2 years. Sure that concept exists but love doesnt fix it. Its like anything, it applies to a percentage of the population, it serves well for victims but more often it creates victims too. A balance, but not always in proportion by any means. I can't justify anyone. I'm sure people have their reasons. I'm not divorced. I love my husband. I agree that many people don't treat love as permanent. I don't know if they feel like I do. Earlier I mentioned instinct as one of the mechanisms that cause the chemical reactions. I agree, I just think we are more than that. We have a consciousness that makes use different. All animals have instinct. Humans can do something so different than just mating. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Walker Posted March 21, 2018 #279 Share Posted March 21, 2018 2 hours ago, Guyver said: Yeah. It’s just that every thing is a human concept for us. So, the real gig is....do we continue to exist when we die physically....or does it even matter? i think of Rudger Hauer in Blade Runner ruminating the loss of his life at his end, and Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce meeting his elders. Either way, we all go out....what comes after that isn’t known. Is it? life after death is a human construct. Other animals do not possess it. Make of it as you will, to serve what ever purpose you need it to serve ( generic use of you) One day human science will end death as we know it,. which will make for an interesting rethink about the purpose of relgious beliefs 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Walker Posted March 21, 2018 #280 Share Posted March 21, 2018 2 hours ago, psyche101 said: I disagree. Love can be as deep as the ocean and end with a finger snap. That's not special anymore, if it was more than chemicals I propose the bond would be deeper. Penguins mate for life, yet many of us are far more shallow than that changing partners and being 'in love' several times in a lifetime, I don't see that as 'special' many species mate for life that are more rudimentary in behaviour and don't express the bonds we glorify, that's obviously a mating instinct that favours procreation. I don't see why it's not more than that. Love is something we glorify and we know we get chemical rewards for being in love. That's an outside influence. It's not special it's chemical. The thing is, some chemicals have awesome effects, that's how we get dependencies. For many of us it is deeper because it is an intellectual construct and we maintain it. I've never had love end with a snap Humans have evolved different biological imperatives to penguins. They mate for life for an evolved purpose we choose how long we mate for, but our biology creates a chemical bond just long enough to conceive, gestate, and nurture a young child. If you want a "love" longer than that, you have to build and maintain it in your mind . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Walker Posted March 21, 2018 #281 Share Posted March 21, 2018 18 hours ago, psyche101 said: I understand it quite well, much better then you it seems. You seem to think your fantasies are reality somthing like the people who envisioned a flying saucer in every garage by the year 2,000. You see I quite like listening to Michio Kaku, who is a futurist. And while he can get a little carried away, he is mundane next to your wild imagination. People do this professionally, you don't and your responses illustrate that clearly. No it wouldn't because that would cause other greater anatomical problems particularly with our back. And the size of the wings grows proportionaly to ridiculous inefficient sizes. Your way out of your depth yet again walker. Your speaking utter nonsense. No it wouldn't. That's not walking naked on the surface of the sun. No, your views are as unrealistic as your imaginary alien god friend who meets you for chats in your backyard. I can only see the most uninformed people considering your wild fantasies as even plausible. Because your ego is blocking your reflection in the mirror. The problem lies with you, not science. And because we advance does not mean your imagination is validated. I know things will change, heck if the religious and spiritual nutters get enough numbers to gain momentum, we could be back in 11th century living before we know it. Some insist in maintaining that way of thinking today after all. Your just not realistic in your expectations or predictions. Your view of the future is unrealistic and rather immature. I just suspect you think that is a place to flex your fantasies and believe you are relieved of accountability. I've often posted links to the mockumentary The Thousand Year Old Man. Have you ever watched it? Michio Kaku has an entire series with several seasons on applying science to science fiction as a futurist. It's called Sci Fi Science: Physics of the Impossible. Those guys are pushing the boundaries, your just being stubborn and rather silly. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sci_Fi_Science:_Physics_of_the_Impossible Ive said all i need to say on this issue See you in 200 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted March 21, 2018 #282 Share Posted March 21, 2018 1 hour ago, nephili said: On this, I can't even relate to the poor children mentioned. I feel sorry they don't have parents that love them like I love my kids. But also, that has no relevance to how much I love my children. No it's not, you've given that love personal meaning like XenoFish said originally. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Walker Posted March 21, 2018 #283 Share Posted March 21, 2018 (edited) 18 hours ago, psyche101 said: So what Xeno said then. You gave it meaning. Not quite he is wrong that love is a chemical, or just a chemical,. induced feeling or emotion. It is an intellectual construct created by our own self awareness, involving symbolism, abstract thoughts and understandings etc. We learn how to love, and construct love, from those around us, but also from things like reading or watching media I learned how to love my wife by watching my parents love for each other but also by reading a lot of literature about great loves and how/why they worked or failed However because love is this, then yes, each individaul constructs a meaning for love for themselves. It has nothing to do with chemicals, however. You can love people you are not physically attracted to, and you can love them for life. You can be chemically attracted to people without any love for them . You make up your mind to love. You build a mindset of love, and as long as you maintain your decision and discipline of mind, you will maintain that love all of your life. Edited March 21, 2018 by Mr Walker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted March 22, 2018 #284 Share Posted March 22, 2018 On 21/03/2018 at 11:53 AM, Will Due said: But it's not an analogy. analogy əˈnalədʒi/ noun a comparison between one thing and another, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification. Yes it is. On 21/03/2018 at 11:53 AM, Will Due said: Belief in the evidence and proofs of science has provided an alternative to what, how, and why ancient worldviews or whatever you want to call it, were thought about in the past. Yes new information has superseded the old, exactly how we learned thunder was not the sound of Thor's hammer as Zeus did not throw lightning bolts to make them appear. This is just more of the same. The current God ideals are redundant. On 21/03/2018 at 11:53 AM, Will Due said: But sometimes these days, it's taken too far. To be rigid or fanatical in belief is never good, whether it be one way or the other. This is where you show that you don't understand science. What are you attributing to fantasism or belief with regards to science Will? On 21/03/2018 at 11:53 AM, Will Due said: Many point out how illogical it is to believe in the Bible literally. But what's the difference if someone claims that the evidences of science are infallible in basically the same way? Peer review, repeatability upon demand and predictability. Its a huge difference to someone making a claim. The Bible has been proven as no literal record, the great flood didn't happen, Adam and eve were not created by a diety from dirt and rib bones, its literature, not historical record. On 21/03/2018 at 11:53 AM, Will Due said: The rigid interpretation of scientific evidence demands the denial of mind. No, it rationalises it and evidence shows the mind is the brain. Again, lobotomies, brain surgery and prediction of head trauma results prove this is the case, how do they not? On 21/03/2018 at 11:53 AM, Will Due said: But you can't do it because obviously, everyone has a mind. And they all have the same basic structure, we are more alike than dissimilar. On 21/03/2018 at 11:53 AM, Will Due said: There's no real objective evidence that mind exists. In fact, scientists are working very hard to prove that the brain IS the mind. So until either they prove the brain IS the mind or prove it is something else; rigidly or fundamentally in the scientific sense, mind does not exist. The attention schema theory describes the evolution of consciousness and we have actually recorded a memory being chemically stored. Thats pretty convincing hard evidence that the mind is the brain. On 21/03/2018 at 11:53 AM, Will Due said: But even you won't do it. Instead you tell me that I don't understand science when that's not what's being misunderstood. Yes it is on your behalf. You don't seen to understand how peer review or testing works. Your posts illustrate this more than you obviously realise. On 21/03/2018 at 11:53 AM, Will Due said: How (or perhaps why) people believe what they believe, is what's misunderstood. Not really. It's the human condition and largely cultural aspects. Depending on where you are born is a strong indicator of ones faith. Many posters here have outright admitted science is too much effort for them to bother with so they adopt a religious world view as it is easy to comprehend. That's not a good reason to promote something as valid, it's an entirely personal view and has no bearing on the real world. The way some describe materialism it reminds me if a more cult like ideology. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cormac mac airt Posted March 22, 2018 #285 Share Posted March 22, 2018 Where is Heaven? First star to the right, straight on till morning. cormac 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted March 22, 2018 #286 Share Posted March 22, 2018 (edited) On 21/03/2018 at 0:36 PM, nephili said: I love my kids. I love my mother. I love my dad. I love my brothers. I love my best friend. They all give me an oxytocin buzz like you wouldn't believe. I don't want to mate with any of them. Love and mating are not related. How is that not your own special meaning for each love in your life? I honestly think you just made the point here. Others don't have that rush when they see those special to you, and many do not even have those close bonds to their own families. You have chosen to give love special meaning. It's not a bad thing, it's just how we are wired and part if the compassion side of consciousness that benefits the continuation of the species. In early hunter gatherer days, these bonds in who you shared food with, whose injuries one would tend to in order to save a life would be the difference between survival and extinction for the clan. We don't need to maintain that as a survival instinct so much these days but the instinct remains and we choose to give it special meaning. Quote I can't justify anyone. I'm sure people have their reasons. I'm not divorced. I love my husband. I agree that many people don't treat love as permanent. I don't know if they feel like I do. Of course many do. People get married every day and people get hurt everyday. I don't know of too many cases where people enter into marriage considering it a temporary situation. But that so called love dissolves like cotton candy in your mouth far too often. Sweet while it lasts and then just nothing. It might be one year, it might be 30. Few see it coming. The suicide rate attached to this cause must be horrendous, but its a statistic that nobody seems to pay any attention to from what I can tell. Quote Earlier I mentioned instinct as one of the mechanisms that cause the chemical reactions. I agree, I just think we are more than that. We have a consciousness that makes use different. All animals have instinct. Humans can do something so different than just mating. So can animals. How can you say situations like this don't show more compassion and what we would label as love than some people show their own offspring or partner? Edited March 22, 2018 by psyche101 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted March 22, 2018 #287 Share Posted March 22, 2018 On 21/03/2018 at 1:12 PM, Mr Walker said: For many of us it is deeper because it is an intellectual construct and we maintain it. That's what XenoFish said, and what is being discussed, we give it special meaning. On 21/03/2018 at 1:12 PM, Mr Walker said: I've never had love end with a snap Why so you think this has anything to do with you personally?? It does not. We don't have to hear about your personal life every post. Give it a rest would you. On 21/03/2018 at 1:12 PM, Mr Walker said: Humans have evolved different biological imperatives to penguins. They mate for life for an evolved purpose we choose how long we mate for, but our biology creates a chemical bond just long enough to conceive, gestate, and nurture a young child. I doubt that single pregnant mums would agree with that. How often are babies aborted? How often does a scumbag take of at the mention of a pregnancy? We are all to familiar with such tales of hardship and woe because we choose what meaning to give love. On 21/03/2018 at 1:12 PM, Mr Walker said: If you want a "love" longer than that, you have to build and maintain it in your mind . Sometimes it just happens, we are also familiar with the love at first sight stories that result in relationships which endure lifetimes, yet if love was more than what we decide it is, that would not happen. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted March 22, 2018 #288 Share Posted March 22, 2018 On 21/03/2018 at 1:15 PM, Mr Walker said: Ive said all i need to say on this issue See you in 200 years No you won't, we will both be dust by then. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted March 22, 2018 #289 Share Posted March 22, 2018 On 21/03/2018 at 1:20 PM, Mr Walker said: Not quite he is wrong that love is a chemical, or just a chemical,. induced feeling or emotion. It is an intellectual construct created by our own self awareness, involving symbolism, abstract thoughts and understandings etc. We learn how to love, and construct love, from those around us, but also from things like reading or watching media I learned how to love my wife by watching my parents love for each other but also by reading a lot of literature about great loves and how/why they worked or failed However because love is this, then yes, each individaul constructs a meaning for love for themselves. It has nothing to do with chemicals, however. You can love people you are not physically attracted to, and you can love them for life. You can be chemically attracted to people without any love for them . You make up your mind to love. You build a mindset of love, and as long as you maintain your decision and discipline of mind, you will maintain that love all of your life. Your contradicting yourself here, and only illustrating what XenoFish stated. Love is a chemical reaction that we give special meaning to, and apart from you protesting against the chemical aspect, that's what your describing here. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted March 22, 2018 #290 Share Posted March 22, 2018 37 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said: Where is Heaven? First star to the right, straight on till morning. cormac Closer for me. Went to Ed Sheeran with Missy Higgins on Wednesday night, hit the town afterwards and totaled myself with some good people. It doesn't get much better than that I reckon if there was a heaven, I reckon mine would be somthing like that. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted March 22, 2018 #291 Share Posted March 22, 2018 (edited) 20 minutes ago, psyche101 said: Oops.... Double post Edited March 22, 2018 by psyche101 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nephili Posted March 23, 2018 #292 Share Posted March 23, 2018 1 hour ago, psyche101 said: How is that not your own special meaning for each love in your life? I honestly think you just made the point here. Others don't have that rush when they see those special to you, and many do not even have those close bonds to their own families. You have chosen to give love special meaning. It's not a bad thing, it's just how we are wired and part if the compassion side of consciousness that benefits the continuation of the species. In early hunter gatherer days, these bonds in who you shared food with, whose injuries one would tend to in order to save a life would be the difference between survival and extinction for the clan. We don't need to maintain that as a survival instinct so much these days but the instinct remains and we choose to give it special meaning. Of course many do. People get married every day and people get hurt everyday. I don't know of too many cases where people enter into marriage considering it a temporary situation. But that so called love dissolves like cotton candy in your mouth far too often. Sweet while it lasts and then just nothing. It might be one year, it might be 30. Few see it coming. The suicide rate attached to this cause must be horrendous, but its a statistic that nobody seems to pay any attention to from what I can tell. So can animals. How can you say situations like this don't show more compassion and what we would label as love than some people show their own offspring or partner? We'll agree to disagree. As opposed to repeating myself, read what I had said to Xenofish before our conversation started. You and I agree on a lot, I just don't think we're the thoughtless tin men that you do. Honestly, it's just refreshing to see someone able to debate without it getting nasty and insulting. I quit posting for months because of that. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Due Posted March 23, 2018 #293 Share Posted March 23, 2018 1 hour ago, psyche101 said: give love special meaning. That's from your reply to Nephili. There's a school of thought, or there are those who believe that human beings are nothing more than machines, based on the scientific evidence. Is that fair to say? And is that what you believe Psyche? So I honestly do not understand. From my school of thought, machines cannot "give meaning." If I have this wrong, then tell me how a machine can give something meaning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harte Posted March 23, 2018 #294 Share Posted March 23, 2018 1 hour ago, psyche101 said: No you won't, we will both be dust by then. Not me. I'm gonna have my body posed in my chair and sealed in a giant cube of plastic resin for posterity. I feel like I owe this gift to the world. Probably it's a chemical thing. Harte 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted March 23, 2018 #295 Share Posted March 23, 2018 12 minutes ago, nephili said: We'll agree to disagree. Fair enough. 12 minutes ago, nephili said: As opposed to repeating myself, read what I had said to Xenofish before our conversation started. You and I agree on a lot, I just don't think we're the thoughtless tin men that you do. I don't think it is thoughtless to apply meaning though in fact rather the opposite. We even over think it often. 12 minutes ago, nephili said: Honestly, it's just refreshing to see someone able to debate without it getting nasty and insulting. I quit posting for months because of that. Thank you. It's not me though, it's you. You are a good poster with a truly open attitude and that's what sets the mood makes a discussion pleasent or otherwise. Your a very reasonable and astute person IMHO. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHaYap Posted March 23, 2018 #296 Share Posted March 23, 2018 17 minutes ago, Harte said: I'm gonna have my body posed in my chair and sealed in a giant cube of plastic resin for posterity. Don't forget to wear a hat Mr Harte ~ 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted March 23, 2018 #297 Share Posted March 23, 2018 19 minutes ago, Will Due said: That's from your reply to Nephili. There's a school of thought, or there are those who believe that human beings are nothing more than machines, based on the scientific evidence. Is that fair to say? And is that what you believe Psyche? Yes but not in the sense your trying to diminish the structure too. We are incerdible pattern recognition machines. 19 minutes ago, Will Due said: So I honestly do not understand. From my school of thought, machines cannot "give meaning." If I have this wrong, then tell me how a machine can give something meaning? With complexity. That's how we open doors. Machines can be taught to feel regret. Your lawnmower can't feel regret, yet AI can and it enhances performance. Your limiting your understanding, and I honestly think deliberately, in order to maintain some special aspects to evolved responses. Over millions of years that process has been enhanced to a point where we don't have to think consciously about such deductions, they just happen and some of us feel that makes us somehow more special than anything else on earth. And in a way that's true, we have managed to advance intelligence through these evolved responses and understand more about ourselves than our ancient ancestors who had more immediate concerns like avoiding predators, or finding sustenance. We don't have to worry about that as much, so our attentions are diverted. This gives us the opportunity to wander explore and be creative. Here's a machine that has meaning in today's world. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1378464/Scientists-teach-computers-feel-regret-improve-performance.html If we didn't think machines could not think, we would have ethical deliberations over the development of AI like we do. Many threads here on that very subject. If you can think you can have meaning. Why would that be the case? https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/futurism.com/artificial-intelligence-is-our-future-but-will-it-save-or-destroy-humanity/amp/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted March 23, 2018 #298 Share Posted March 23, 2018 35 minutes ago, Harte said: Not me. I'm gonna have my body posed in my chair and sealed in a giant cube of plastic resin for posterity. I feel like I owe this gift to the world. Probably it's a chemical thing. Harte I reckon I'll have my ashes loaded into spectacular fireworks to be set off at my wake during late evening with a great band playing and plenty of food and drink. I'd like Pink Floyd's great gig in the sky playing during the fireworks show. Out with a bang and everyone having a good time, that's how I'd like to be remembered. I dont think I'd want to be a mummy. Plenty of mummies already, one even posts regularly on this board gotta rest someday......... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Due Posted March 23, 2018 #299 Share Posted March 23, 2018 14 minutes ago, psyche101 said: If you can think you can have meaning. Why would that be the case? Because I'm not a machine? I would continue this conversation but I believe it best to leave it right here. I read your linked article and have many thoughts about it and the idea that humans are not more than biological machines. But I'm afraid that I don't have enough talent in putting these thoughts into words that won't appear to be insulting. Which I don't want to do. Anyways, back to my peanut butter sandwich and Office reruns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted March 23, 2018 #300 Share Posted March 23, 2018 32 minutes ago, Will Due said: Because I'm not a machine? That doesn't make any sense though. If a machine can be creative, and feel regret, why is that not thinking? 32 minutes ago, Will Due said: I would continue this conversation but I believe it best to leave it right here. I read your linked article and have many thoughts about it and the idea that humans are not more than biological machines. Thoughts are fine, but what does the evidence say? That's what fine tunes thought into fact. 32 minutes ago, Will Due said: But I'm afraid that I don't have enough talent in putting these thoughts into words that won't appear to be insulting. Which I don't want to do. An explanation does not have to be highly technical, just factual. The only thing this comment reminds me of is this famous quote. 32 minutes ago, Will Due said: Anyways, back to my peanut butter sandwich and Office reruns. Enjoy. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now