It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Wandering Scribe
reply to post by OneEleven
Do you find it interesting that you assume there are only two right answers to your inquiry?
1. my "world view" is illusory, and wrong.
2. your world view is illusory, but it is better to live in that illusion than to embrace reality.
Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by Kashai
That doesn't really "prove" materialism is wrong. That just proves that there are things that we still don't understand. Maybe there is a natural reason for that - or not.
If we assume, then that is belief and not actual "knowing".
It is just a theory that the mind is in the brain, based on REACTIONS of neurons in the brain while thinking. The brain being a receiver of mind is another theory. We can't actually prove either way, so why talk as if we had the "facts" on either side ? (Materialism vs Non-Locality)
Originally posted by Kashai
reply to post by Wandering Scribe
If materialism were correct, naturally humans should respond to conditioning as animals do. The problem is, that does not happen. so insofar as the human condition, there is something beyond nature that is the result of human behavior.
That would be the simplest way of stating it and understanding why materialism is wrong.
Originally posted by Kashai
Evidence based upon practical applications exist that, when it comes to actual conclusions related to materialism. Consciousness is beyond the models ability to ascertain. Curing a psychotic condition using materialism as an absolute, results in law suits and the closing of facilities, that offer such a theory as accurate.
What would you offer as an alternative to operant conditioning or positive reinforcement? The issue is that biology as we commonly understand it, explains the human condition. If it were in fact correct psychosis would be currently treatable applying such methods.
It is not...
Any thoughts?
Originally posted by OneEleven
Originally posted by Wandering Scribe
reply to post by OneEleven
Do you find it interesting that you assume there are only two right answers to your inquiry?
1. my "world view" is illusory, and wrong.
2. your world view is illusory, but it is better to live in that illusion than to embrace reality.
Ugh ... you've entirely missed the point ... YOUR reality is NOT MY reality ... it's as simple as that ...
You say "The TRUTH is the world is an ugly place" . MY world is not an ugly place. This is not MY truth. This is you're truth. For someone who dosn't believe in the collective, you yourself are trying to build your own collective.
"Don't you feel like me? Come on guys, feel like me. My truth can be your truth"
Meanwhile, i'm trying to bring you around to my own collective. Ironic, no?
Which one of us is the white blood cell, and which one is the cancer? Each with it's own separate goal. One dark. One light. BOTH right, and both CONNECTED by being just one building block in a greater organism, but not COLLECTIVE in our goals.
If you feel like your world view is right, have fun over there ... To me, it sounds awfully gray and depressing .... I didn't paint that picture of YOUR world ... YOU did .. YOU created your reality ...
If you're happy with it, stay there ... You may want to get an umbrella ...
Originally posted by Kashai
reply to post by Tennessee77
Flinching is not a response to conditioning it is more a instinct, a desire to observe a phenomena before forming a conclusion. Conditioning in humans and the more intelligent animals, involves education.
That allow for alternatives for what exactly a stimulus, is that caused one to initially flinch in response.
Flinching is not a response to conditioning it is more a instinct, a desire to observe a phenomena before forming a conclusion. Conditioning in humans and the more intelligent animals, involves education.
That allow for alternatives for what exactly a stimulus is, that caused one to initially flinch in response.
Implied is that the, "Cold Hard Reality" is that human experiences are much more sophisticated than the life of your average Lizard who also flinch in response to a stimuli .
Any thoughts?edit on 3-9-2012 by Kashai because: Added content
Originally posted by Tennessee77
Originally posted by Kashai
reply to post by Tennessee77
Flinching is not a response to conditioning it is more a instinct, a desire to observe a phenomena before forming a conclusion. Conditioning in humans and the more intelligent animals, involves education.
That allow for alternatives for what exactly a stimulus, is that caused one to initially flinch in response.
Flinching is not a response to conditioning it is more a instinct, a desire to observe a phenomena before forming a conclusion. Conditioning in humans and the more intelligent animals, involves education.
That allow for alternatives for what exactly a stimulus is, that caused one to initially flinch in response.
Implied is that the, "Cold Hard Reality" is that human experiences are much more sophisticated than the life of your average Lizard who also flinch in response to a stimuli .
Any thoughts?edit on 3-9-2012 by Kashai because: Added content
Flinching is most definately a conditioned response. Baby's do not flinch.
In line with recent work in swarm intelligence research involving optimization algorithms inspired by the behavior of social insects (including bees, ants and termites), and vertebrates such as fish and birds, there has recently been research on using bee waggle dance behavior for efficient fault-tolerant routing.[16] From the abstract of Wedde, Farooq, and Zhang (2004)[17]:
In this paper we present a novel routing algorithm, BeeHive, which has been inspired by the communicative and evaluative methods and procedures of honey bees. In this algorithm, bee agents travel through network regions called foraging zones. On their way their information on the network state is delivered for updating the local routing tables. BeeHive is fault tolerant, scalable, and relies completely on local, or regional, information, respectively. We demonstrate through extensive simulations that BeeHive achieves a similar or better performance compared to state-of-the-art algorithms.
Another bee-inspired stigmergic computational technique called bee colony optimization is employed in Internet Server Optimization.[18][19]
The Zigbee RF protocol is named after the waggle dance.
Originally posted by Tennessee77
When you hear a loud noise and you flinch, that is conditioning.
Originally posted by Kashai
reply to post by arpgme
A problem being that as of the year 2012 modern science has not produced and effective way to adress the issue of Psychosis. The reality of the problem is quite serious taking into consideration, the materialist position.