Jump to content

Freewill: an evolved homo sapiens sapiens ability, one shared with many other species.


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

My favourite author is one J.R.R. Tolkien. He happened to be an arch-conservative (in the classical sense), and was sympathetic to General Franco.

Be serious Tolkien's support to the Franco movement rest precisely on his perception of him as the champion of the Catholic Church, end of story.  Tolkien was also not an arch-conservative in any sense, he was an anarchist-monarchist, so think back to the times of small kingdoms Pre-Roman or Pre-Alfred Britain where a monarch's power was not overpowering, could be countered much more easily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Traveller between Worlds said:

Be serious Tolkien's support to the Franco movement rest precisely on his perception of him as the champion of the Catholic Church, end of story.  Tolkien was also not an arch-conservative in any sense, he was an anarchist-monarchist, so think back to the times of small kingdoms Pre-Roman or Pre-Alfred Britain where a monarch's power was not overpowering, could be countered much more easily.

Yes, Tolkien sympathised with Franco because of his Catholicism - the Catholic Church being history's most enduring force for conservatism. 

You may have noticed that I referred to conservatism in the classical sense, rather than the modern sense. The differentiation makes all the difference. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

1. There have been lots of claims based off studies for a very long time. If every one of those was a "scientific fact", we would have some highly contradictory facts. How about waiting for multiple replicated results before jumping to conclusions, eh? Reproducibility being one of the cornerstones of the scientific method.

Far to generalized your argument is meaningless, yes food science claims a lot of things for example.  You need to understand what MRIs are what the level of evidence they provide, do you really want me to cite all the anatomical scientific factual studies about these brain structures?  Go read up on them yourself, you do know this study is based on studies of the function of the amygdala and frontal lobe right?  They haven't researched new facts on what those brain structures do, you do know this right?  Do you think they're researching what those structures do? haha.  The study is based on A MOUNTAIN OF STUDIES conducted over decades.

Quote

2. I truly love how you are accusing me of labelling others as "hackneyed simpletons". Just because one is a conservative (as Tolkien was, though not in the American tradition) does not mean that they are only capable of writing thinly disguised allegory. Do you want me to dig up some appropriate quotes from his letters?

He was anti-political, an anarchist-monarchist, not sure what part of anarchist you don't understand.

Quote

 

3. This must be the first time in my life I've ever been called a conservative simpleton. Just so you know, I'm a democratic socialist, and probably to the Left of you on economics. I just have this funny idea that people might legitimately disagree on how society should be run, and certainly don't feel the need to label non-socialists "simpletons with undeveloped brains".

(Seriously, of all the people you had to call conservative...).   

 

Call yourself what you want, I've forwarded Universal Basic Income highlighting that we have extremely intelligent people wasted by rightwing agenda that sidelined them in terrible school system that was obstinate on purpose, because conservatives of all political colours want to side line as many people as possible and calling it free market competition while sending their children to private schools where they are given direct access to the people who write the exam questions!

I have brought air pollution back onto the political agenda again after decades of nothing.  I have made it very clear the true problem we face is an Oligarchy that controls the means of fiat money creation, and their destruction of a vast amount of people we need to solve what are called Great Filters in cosmological terms.  That destruction of the opportunities for the lower economic classes is a Great Filter in itself.

Quote

and certainly don't feel the need to label non-socialists "simpletons with undeveloped brains".

They have the same brains as the rest of us, it is how they are using their brains which is the issue, if someone is screaming because they are walking on their hands and feet telling them that they need to walk on their feet and they wont be screaming and forcing others to walk like they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Traveller between Worlds said:

Scientific fact go look it up you ridiculous person, a scientific fact is an objective and verifiable observation, the study provides this.  Means nothing to you I know.  You want to provide a study that contradicts the one which is the basis for this hypothesis please do.  Oh and the  hypothesis is not mine, it's on wiki where Kalbear's study is quoted as one of it's scientific bases.

 

First, a single study has never in the history of mankind proved anything. A single study means jack shit no matter how well done it was. (and this sure as hell was not a exemplary study it used 90 people. But apparently that's less important than the authors using the word large to describe the size, like large has a precise scientific definition)

Second, studies are not the basis of hypothesis they are an attempt to disprove a hypothesis already formed. If you are coming up with a hypothesis after performing a study than you are doing it backwards and just trying to find something in the data. Let me do that and I could hypothesize that global warming is caused by a lack of pirates and you'd be here crowing about that "scientific fact".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Traveller between Worlds said:

They have the same brains as the rest of us, it is how they are using their brains which is the issue, if someone is screaming because they are walking on their hands and feet telling them that they need to walk on their feet and they wont be screaming and forcing others to walk like they are.

Worse stopping as many people as possible from walking at all, crawling at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Traveller between Worlds said:

They have the same brains as the rest of us, it is how they are using their brains which is the issue, if someone is screaming because they are walking on their hands and feet telling them that they need to walk on their feet and they wont be screaming and forcing others to walk like they are.

Worse stopping as many people as possible from walking at all, crawling at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maarsen said:

Nice reply, Rbpl. Personally, any argument with glaring grammatical errors and dubious scientific sounding facts is not usually worthy of a reply. 

No evidence how convenient that you can say that without having to provide any evidence, people in the world know you think you don't need highfalutin things like evidence, words are for the weak right?, except words crush the minds of people like you, and what you think you have domain over, the physical, you find out you have no domain over that either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, TrueMetis said:

First, a single study has never in the history of mankind proved anything. A single study means jack shit no matter how well done it was. (and this sure as hell was not a exemplary study it used 90 people. But apparently that's less important than the authors using the word large to describe the size, like large has a precise scientific definition)

Second, studies are not the basis of hypothesis they are an attempt to disprove a hypothesis already formed. If you are coming up with a hypothesis after performing a study than you are doing it backwards and just trying to find something in the data. Let me do that and I could hypothesize that global warming is caused by a lack of pirates and you'd be here crowing about that "scientific fact".

That study is based on a mountain of studies about what those brain structures do, that this needs to be explained is ridiculous. 

You're actually going to claim a scientific study using the word 'large' has no precise scientific definition, they wouldn't pass per review you utter idiot if the word wasn't correctly used.  You do know what peer review is don't you? haha.

Studies advance a hypotheses' status as being not false, they completely provide the basis for a hypothesis advancing to theory status.  Plenty of hypotheses have been thought up after a study disproved an old hypothesis as falsified.

 I know you have a circle jerk going on here, I like GRRM's books and sometimes came into general chat, I've knocked out rightwing trolls here and I only post a few times a year. 

Quote

I could hypothesize that global warming is caused by a lack of pirates and you'd be here crowing about that "scientific fact".

You're an idiot lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Traveller between Worlds said:

No evidence how convenient that you can say that without having to provide any evidence, people in the world know you think you don't need highfalutin things like evidence, words are for the weak right?, except words crush the minds of people like you, and what you think you have domain over, the physical, you find out you have no domain over that either.

Bad grammar is its own evidence. Quoting studies you don't understand is evidence also. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Traveller between Worlds said:

In the paper: "In a large sample of young adults, we related self-reported political attitudes to gray matter volume using structural MRI. We found that greater liberalism was associated with increased gray matter volume in the anterior cingulate cortex, whereas greater conservatism was associated with increased volume of the right amygdala." 

What part of that word don't you understand?

A large sample is 90 adults from the UK. What part of 90 adults don't you understand? Do you consider 90 adults to be a large sample? Do you consider a sample that has zero 'strongly conservative' people to be representative of the UK, much less the world?

7 hours ago, Traveller between Worlds said:

I'd explain sample sizes to you as they relate to the depth of the scientific study being undertaken but it would be lost on you just as my repeated explanation concerning  public accommodations which are protected by civil rights laws, go open a hall to the paying public say you are denying one demographic, watch as you are shut down.  Why someone would want to deny large sections of the public, think that's even an intelligent thing to do, disruptive presences can be removed peacefully, conservatives are ones who resort to violence, over strong group affiliation.  It's their evolutionary survival strategy, the group is betrayed and then their family and then themselves, that's what happens to exclusionists they  end up excluding even themselves.  Self implosion, bad thing is they take many others with them.

Go ahead, please do explain sample sizes as you understand them to me. Please explain how when self-categorizing people into 5 discrete buckets how having zero in one bucket represents anything like a reasonable sample selection. 

And again, the Alamo Drafthouse wasn't shut down nor were their actions shown to be illegal. Whether or not you think that should be the case is immaterial; that IS the case. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

My favourite author is one J.R.R. Tolkien. He happened to be an arch-conservative (in the classical sense), and was sympathetic to General Franco. Doesn't stop me from appreciating him and his work.

To poke another hole in your ridiculous claims - what about people who change their views over the course of their lives? What sort of brain do they have?

 

Here's JRR Tolkien's very own words below, he was an anarchist-monarchist as I stated, why you believe conservative political propaganda I do not know.  Claiming him as your favourite author when the letter below was written right in the middle of the period where he was writing LOTR makes you look extremely foolish at best, you claiming he was an arch conservative makes you a conservative propagandist.

https://peacerequiresanarchy.wordpress.com/2012/09/21/the-letters-of-jrr-tolkien/

Quote

 

The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien

September 21, 2012 by PeaceRequiresAnarchy 19 Comments

From a letter to Christopher Tolkien [from his father J.R.R. Tolkien] 29 November 1943

[In the summer of 1943, Christopher, then aged eighteen, was called up into the Royal Air Force. When this letter was written, he was at a training camp in Manchester.]

John Ronald Reuel Tolkien (3 January 1892 – 2 September 1973)

John Ronald Reuel Tolkien (3 January 1892 – 2 September 1973)

My political opinions lean more and more to Anarchy (philosophically understood, meaning abolition of control not whiskered men with bombs) – or to ‘unconstitutional’ Monarchy. I would arrest anybody who uses the word State (in any sense other than the inanimate realm of England and its inhabitants, a thing that has neither power, rights nor mind); and after a chance of recantation, execute them if they remained obstinate! If we could get back to personal names, it would do a lot of good. Government is an abstract noun meaning the art and process of governing and it should be an offence to write it with a capital G or so as to refer to people. If people were in the habit of referring to ‘King George’s council, Winston and his gang’, it would go a long way to clearing thought, and reducing the frightful landslide into Theyocracy. Anyway the proper study of Man is anything but Man; and the most improper job of any man, even saints (who at any rate were at least unwilling to take it on), is bossing other men. Not one in a million is fit for it, and least of all those who seek the opportunity. And at least it is done only to a small group of men who know who their master is. The mediævals were only too right in taking nolo efiscopari as the best reason a man could give to others for making him a bishop. Give me a king whose chief interest in life is stamps, railways, or race-horses; and who has the power to sack his Vizier (or whatever you care to call him) if he does not like the cut of his trousers. And so on down the line. But, of course, the fatal weakness of all that – after all only the fatal weakness of all good natural things in a bad corrupt unnatural world – is that it works and has worked only when all the world is messing along in the same good old inefficient human way. The quarrelsome, conceited Greeks managed to pull it off against Xerxes; but the abominable chemists and engineers have put such a power into Xerxes’ hands, and all ant-communities, that decent folk don’t seem to have a chance. We are all trying to do the Alexander-touch – and, as history teaches, that orientalized Alexander and all his generals. The poor boob fancied (or liked people to fancy) he was the son of Dionysus, and died of drink. The Greece that was worth saving from Persia perished anyway; and became a kind of Vichy-Hellas, or Fighting-Hellas (which did not fight), talking about Hellenic honour and culture and thriving on the sale of the early equivalent of dirty postcards. But the special horror of the present world is that the whole damned thing is in one bag. There is nowhere to fly to. Even the unlucky little Samoyedes, I suspect, have tinned food and the village loudspeaker telling Stalin’s bed-time stories about Democracy and the wicked Fascists who eat babies and steal sledge-dogs. There is only one bright spot and that is the growing habit of disgruntled men of dynamiting factories and power-stations; I hope that, encouraged now as ‘patriotism’, may remain a habit! But it won’t do any good, if it is not universal.

latest?cb=20060310233629

Tolkien’s Cover Designs for the First Edition of The Lord of the Rings

Well, cheers and all that to you dearest son. We were born in a dark age out of due time (for us). But there is this comfort: otherwise we should not know, or so much love, what we do love. I imagine the fish out of water is the only fish to have an inkling of water. Also we have still small swords to use. ‘I will not bow before the Iron Crown, nor cast my own small golden sceptre down.’ Have at the Ores, with winged words, hildenǣddran (war-adders), biting darts – but make sure of the mark, before shooting.


Source: The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien [PDF], p. 74

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Traveller between Worlds said:

That study is based on a mountain of studies about what those brain structures do, that this needs to be explained is ridiculous. 

Irrelevant, because the study isn't supporting the other studies, it's trying to prove something new.

Quote

You're actually going to claim a scientific study using the word 'large' has no precise scientific definition, they wouldn't pass per review you utter idiot if the word wasn't correctly used.  You do know what peer review is don't you? haha.

Feel free to post that definition then. Besides, while important, peer review doesn't catch everything. Wakefield got past peer review.

Also the reason this study likely passed peer-review is because unlike you they don't make any definite claims. They're honest enough to say "correlated".

Quote

Studies advance a hypotheses' status as being not false, they completely provide the basis for a hypothesis advancing to theory status.  Plenty of hypotheses have been thought up after a study disproved an old hypothesis as falsified.

Way to shift the goal posts, but at least you are correct this time. Yes studies are about dealing with hypotheses that already exist. (When they think up a new hypothesis when an old one is disproven they then have to go on to create a new study to prove or disprove it, they don't get to use the study they just did as proof)

Quote

 I know you have a circle jerk going on here, I like GRRM's books and sometimes came into general chat, I've knocked out rightwing trolls here and I only post a few times a year. 

We got plenty of people capable of doing that far better than you thanks... It is very weird to be accused of being in a rightwing circle jerk when all the rightwinger's accuse us of being in a leftist one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Traveller between Worlds said:

Here's JRR Tolkien's very own words below, he was an anarchist-monarchist as I stated, why you believe conservative political propaganda I do not know.  Claiming him as your favourite author when the letter below was written right in the middle of the period where he was writing LOTR makes you look extremely foolish at best, you claiming he was an arch conservative makes you a conservative propagandist.

FFS.

There is nothing in there that contradicts Tolkien being a classical conservative. Indeed, "anarchist/unconstitutional monarchist" can hardly fit with any flavour of liberalism, classical or otherwise, since you are dealing with a man who rejected rationalist/secular/humanist social projects. He was no socialist either, though some of his ideas do approach William Morris from another direction.

Again, I would emphasise that there is a distinction between classical conservatism, and what people think of as being conservative today. These things become doubly difficult if you realise that what America calls conservatism (small government, free-market economics) is called liberalism in Europe. If you mean Tolkien was not an American-style conservative, I would agree with you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if i were on any other forum i would've posted

but since i am lurking around today i gotta say...how the fuck did a OP about freewill, brain size and political leanings...(which is total bullshit, in my not so fucking humble opinion) develop into a circle jerk... 

 

On 7/28/2017 at 1:46 PM, Traveller between Worlds said:

No evidence how convenient that you can say that without having to provide any evidence, people in the world know you think you don't need highfalutin things like evidence, words are for the weak right?, except words crush the minds of people like you, and what you think you have domain over, the physical, you find out you have no domain over that either.

first time i ever heard the word highfalutin used to crush the minds of circle-jerkers...rightwingers or leftists

...gotta say "where's the chili pepper lotion?" would come way closer to crushing this well-known onanist's mind

 

18 hours ago, TrueMetis said:

<snip>

We got plenty of people capable of doing that far better than you thanks... It is very weird to be accused of being in a rightwing circle jerk when all the rightwinger's accuse us of being in a leftist one.

...this is why i stay outta here, man...too much sticky shit on the floor

:smoking:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, rocksniffer said:

if i were on any other forum i would've posted

but since i am lurking around today i gotta say...how the fuck did a OP about freewill, brain size and political leanings...(which is total bullshit, in my not so fucking humble opinion) develop into a circle jerk... 

 

first time i ever heard the word highfalutin used to crush the minds of circle-jerkers...rightwingers or leftists

...gotta say "where's the chili pepper lotion?" would come way closer to crushing this well-known onanist's mind

 

...this is why i stay outta here, man...too much sticky shit on the floor 

:smoking:

 

And here as little old me, thinking you were mostly responsible for the sticky shit on the floor around here ;) ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Accused of bad grammar by someone who doesn't capitalize the first letter of their name haha, that was the reason given for being banned when the real reason is feminism has a good amount of female chauvinists in it's ranks.  Feminism is a conservative divisive ideology, it was backed by the Oligarchy to divide the lower economic classes, but hey as long as some 'feminists' are using it to get crumbs from their owners genital juice covered hands, lick it up fake equality person, kiss your owner's boots.  Egalitarians look at all chauvinists as selfish scum.

Statists, who are always conservatives, want to keep the means of wealth production in their local Oligarchy's hands with stripped away environmental regulations and social justice trampled into the mud, this is what they mean by 'small' government, it is huge government for most people.  

The atrocities, mass murders, mass theft, mass enslavement, committed by conservatives (conserving themselves, which is what all criminals think they are doing) is based on jealousy and selfishness.

Many USA liberals are conservatives.

Don't vandalize the Biology and political orientation wiki page.  Revert the page back to an archived copy takes three clicks of a mouse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...