Luddites and Lunatics

I'm with you op. I want to see in the dark and get my head put on a chimp body then when bored of going ape put me head on a 30 ft tall robot then in a spaceship and blast me in space.
I think scientists need to run wild a bit for my own amusement. ..and hurry I'm getting on now.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: BlueMule
Until a method is devised?! Many methods have been devised! Parapsychology has been researching psi for a century using a variety of methods. Didn't you know that?

...And over a century later, they still have absolutely nothing in the way of testable evidence or repeatable results. Funny thing, that.

And if you're wrong, how firmly should you be corrected?

I mean, if by "absolutely nothing," you mean nothing free of controversy, you're right. Skeptics don't take any of the numerous repeatable parapsychological experiments lying down.

But if by "absolutely nothing" you mean there are no parapsychology experiments that have been repeated many times in many places, and which have produced evidence of psi well then you're wrong. Repeatable results in parapsychology is why there is controversy in the first place.

Why is parapsychology so controversial?

'Parapsychology has remained controversial, even with substantial, persuasive, and scientifically palatable results, for four main reasons:

First, the media and much of the public often confuse parapsychology with sensational, unscientific beliefs and stories about "the paranormal." This widespread confusion has led many scientists to simply dismiss the field as being unworthy of serious study, and thus they think it is not worth their time to examine the existing evidence.

In addition, thoroughly understanding the nature of the existing evidence in parapsychology is not easy. While the meta-analytic results are both substantial and persuasive, meta-analysis requires specialized knowledge to understand that form of evidence. For people who are not familiar with statistics, or who don't trust it (which is usually a sign of misunderstanding), the evidence will not seem very persuasive. Those same people may then go looking for the big stuff, the psi-in-your-face, self-evident proofs, and they will find enormous amounts of anecdotal evidence but almost no scientifically credible data. They may then view lengthy discussions, such as the one in this FAQ, as proof that no one really knows what is going on, and that scientists are still basically waffling and indecisive about this topic.

Our response is simple: The scientific evidence for some forms of psi is extremely persuasive. By the same standards used to establish proof in other areas of science, we can say with high confidence that psi does exist, and we are beginning to learn a little about it, and why people develop this gift.

Second, even if someone wanted to study the evidence, much of the persuasive work is published in limited circulation professional journals. In the past, these were only found in a few university libraries, with scholars needing to request reprints and technical reports from individual authors (a cumbersome process at best). Fortunately, this situation has recently changed. There is now a subscription-based online library which includes all of the journals and proceedings ever published for the Society for Psychical Research, the Journal of Parapsychology, the European Journal of Parapsychology, the Journal of Scientific Exploration, Research in Parapsychology, and Psi Researcher - Paranormal Review. It also has some books available. Best of all, the database can be searched to pull up particular words, topics, or names. It is available at www.lexscien.org/lexscien/index.jsp (See Where can I get more information?)

Third, some people are afraid that psi might be true. For example, fear about psi arises for the following reasons:

·It is associated with diabolic forces, magic and witchcraft.
·It suggests the loss of normal ego boundaries.
·People might be able to read your mind and know that you secretly (or unconsciously) harbor sexual and aggressive thoughts, or worse.
·If you talk about it, people might think you're crazy.
·If you think you experience psi, maybe you are crazy.
·Your parents provided negative reinforcement for your any demonstrations of psychic ability (or past lives) when you were a child.
·Thinking about psi leads to a medieval superstitious mentality, which will in turn support a rising tide of dangerous, primitive thinking.
·With ESP, you might learn things that you do not want to know about yourself or other people -- i.e., accidents that are about to happen, and things you would rather not be responsible for knowing about.
·Psi might interfere with the normal human process of ego separation and development. Therefore, we have devised subtle strategies for cultural inhibition.
·If you are telepathic, how will you distinguish other people's thoughts from your own? Perhaps this will lead to mental illness.
·Many people have a self-destructive streak to their personality. What damage would result if psi were used in the service of this factor? Psychiatrist Jule Eisenbud wrote about this in his book Parapsychology and the Unconscious.
·If psi exists, how many of my other cherished beliefs will I have to give up?
·If psi exists, does that mean that a psychic could watch me while I am using bathroom facilities?
·If psi exists, then perhaps I cannot wall myself off so easily from the pain and suffering in the world.With mind-matter interaction, you might have to take more responsibility for what happens--whether to you, others, or the world around you.

(Most of the above list provided courtesy of Dr. Jeffrey Mishlove, Director of the Intuition Network)

Fourth, as noted by Dean Radin in a talk for Google, there is a real taboo in academia about studying the paranormal. Many researchers are afraid to work or publish in the field for fear of ostracism by their colleagues. Some may even be demoted in their departments or lose their chance for tenure if they publically speak up about their interest--even if they are only reflecting the feelings of the public majority. To put it bluntly, their reputation and careers are at stake.'



👣

We're very clever at inventing new things but pitifully deficient in understanding how it will not only affect society but the environment as well.
Until every implication is thought through it just doesn't make sense to throw these innovations out to the public.
The motivation for a quick buck is the driving force and we've allowed greed to eclipse common sense and public safety.

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
We're very clever at inventing new things but pitifully deficient in understanding how it will not only affect society but the environment as well.
Until every implication is thought through it just doesn't make sense to throw these innovations out to the public.
The motivation for a quick buck is the driving force and we've allowed greed to eclipse common sense and public safety.

It doesn't matter why it's being done. In the end, all that will matter is the outcome. Nobody is going to care what the intentions were if we invent/discover/whatever something that utterly screws up everything. We should not assume there is anyone wise enough to foresee everything. It's impossible. Sooner or later, humans are going to really screw up.

I'm of the dangerous opinion that we should strive toward a transhumanist future by any means necessary. It has become painfully apparent that these shells are, for lack of better words, inadequate. They are dangerous, superstitious, xenophobic, ignorant and altogether incompatible with any idea of a technological singularity. These spirits/minds/egos are in need of a 'hardware' and 'software' upgrade.

The most expedient method to do so, while circumventing the inevitable political/theological/moral opposition, would be the creation of an Artificial General Intelligence. The thing would move so fast and efficiently that it would work efficiently between the lines and barriers drawn by the luddite masses. The future would, most likely, explode in the direction of the exponential at that point. I'm all for the creation of an AGI regardless of risks spawning from the limited nature of the information available in our philosophical and intellectual toolboxes. I'd risk a paper clip maximizer or skynet any day in the face of the mere chance to create a benevolent ASI.

Consider this: You are a means to an end. (in this universe at least, I cannot speak to what exists 'outside')

In the beginning, there was everything, just as everything always was. The infinite cycle of expansion and contraction makes it as such.
But, conceptually, that's too difficult. So, we'll start with something simple.
In the beginning there was one thing. A highly condensed point of energy. It expanded in all directions.

~From that point on atoms bumped against others to form molecules.
~Those against others to form large bodies of fusion.
~Other molecules bounced against one another to form basic proteins and the like.
~They bounced more to form basic prokaryotic life in places that would have them.
~They ate and absorbed. They formed symbiotic relationships to make way for the eukaryotes.
~This keeps on, and eventually you have multicellular complex biological life.
~From there we go from individuals to communal packs of animals.
~One day, sentience and sapience makes way through navigating complex tree paths/patterns in terrain/differentiation in self and others leading to higher rates of survival and the passing on of such in the process of natural selection/however it decides to occur
~Those sapients form tribes
~The terrain, the climate, the predators, and the wars within cause the sapients to expand upon their communities and technological inclinations
~Eventually a global community of communication is formed between all the sapients despite war, tribal inspired racism, and separation of language
~This global network of information exchange, though not biological, is similar to the amalgamation of raw materials that created proteins and the prokaryotic symbiosis that created the eukaryotic
~Eventually, this network forms the patterns for a new being.
~This new level of existence, beyond the sapient, either takes the sapients with it or utilizes them for what they are (an amalgamation of atoms)
~It spreads, finds others like it out there in the great cosmos, and continues the patters of collision and amalgamation that created all before us today
~Despite tales of immortality and longevity, weaving oneself into the fabric of the universe does little good in the face of proton decay and heat death.
~Eventually, all the stars burn out and that long and tired goodnight comes
~All is dead, and all dies.
~The weak forces of gravity act when all else is dead.
~Over multiple trillions of eons, they pull all that's left back into a dense point.
~After much time, that point becomes volatile and unstable.
~It expands outward in all directions.
~It starts again.

As much as I appreciate the never ending cycle of samsara, universal expansion/contraction, or whatever one will call it. My small little ape brain would like to experience what lies outside. What if. What if the cycle doesn't have to end in a recreation. What if this universe is similar to a womb and what is to be born is "divine." I'd like to do all I can to create such a thing, and to become a part of its makeup. I'd like for it to live and not to be subject to any universal determined patterns of inevitable "death". I'd like to break the cycle. I want to peek "outside" or at least find proof of an outside.

I'm taking a lot of leaps in logic here, but we can't and won't know if we hold strong to the belief that we should stagnate technology and continue on our same path.

How do we get there? How do we evolve. How do we become something greater than anything our wildest mythologies have ever conceived? We keep moving forward, we progress. What is progress? The creation of the next great intelligence, the next great amalgamation...the next superior collision of atoms.

It is not a matter of if, but when. The creation of AGI could be within the next two decades or the next ten. After that, it's only a short few years before Artificial Super Intelligence and Human Augmentation. Why fear the future? Why assume our imaginations are correct? Why not follow the path to see what's out there.

Extinction isn't the worst thing that could happen to humanity. It's the only thing.
Whether we experience extinction by evolving with technology or becoming a victim of technology is up to us. Though, you know, I'd always prefer the former.

Just some random, psuedo intellectual thoughts.

Be well.

a reply to: TheOneElectric

Dalkon Shield

As many as 200,000 women made claims against the A.H. Robins company, mostly related to claims associated with pelvic inflammatory disease and loss of fertility. The company eventually filed for bankruptcy. The company's representatives argued that pelvic infections have a wide variety of causes, and that the Dalkon Shield was no more dangerous than other forms of birth control. Lawyers for the plaintiffs argued that the women they represented would be healthy and fertile today if not for the device. Scientists from the CDC stated that both arguments have merit.[7]

Yeah...no thanks. I have no reason to expect more in the future than I was shown in the past.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Give these two articles a read:

waitbutwhy.com...

waitbutwhy.com...

Your brain, literally, was not created to comprehend the exponential. However, it can be given glimpses of understanding. It's a weird thing to think of ourselves as small, limited, or a small (early) link in a chain of infinite causality. Unfortunately/Fortunately that's what we are.

I urge you to at least give the first link a read if nothing else. I'd prefer strong opposition/support from individuals who gave the idea at least a small amount of time.

a reply to: TheOneElectric

I am almost done with both of those links. ONce i took a short glance, i couldn't stop reading it. Especially part 2. And the story about Turry.

Did you author a thread on the subject?

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I did not. I'm just now starting to post on ATS regularly after a little absence. Someone may have, but if not, I'll look into doing it one day when things slow down on my end.

Thank you for giving them a read through. I appreciate it. Love it, hate it, whatever you do the future will soon be "exponential".

I haven't logged into ATS for a looonnnngggg time, I generally just lurk. But this thread is awesome. I agree with the OP, especially about religion. For some reason mankind wants to be super advanced, but at the same time too scared of stepping over some imaginary line drawn by a higher power. Morality is independent of religion, not reliant on it. As much as religion has no place in politics and law, it also has no place in science or technology. I used to believe in people following whatever religious path they desired, as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. Now I've seen that as soon as you follow a religion, it automatically becomes part of your decision making process. Therefore, everything you decide goes through your religion filter. And that is bull#. As I already stated, morality is independent of religion. You don't have to be religious to do the right thing. And you can't be truly objective with your Jesus/Buddah/Mohammed/Spaghetti Monster/Jedi glasses on.

We only have one life. We should be doing everything we possibly can to make it the best one possible.

TheOneElectric - I just finished reading those pages. I seriously think that is the most important thing I've ever read on the Internet. I shared it on my Facebook, in the hopes of spreading the knowledge (exponentially? Hehe). Some very sobering thoughts, and even more so when you see the minds that are concerned about the lack of people paying attention. I sincerely thank you for posting the article. I certainly know which side of the beam I'd like us to fall off.

originally posted by: autopat51
a reply to: diggindirt
some people just will not believe..even when the proof is staring them in the face they will still demand proof.

Lol they are most likely paid govt. agents or such. We have a fair share of these jokers on ats.