Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 43 of 43

Thread: Evolutionary Models for Consciential Life on Earth

  1. #31
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    5th November 2019
    Posts
    65
    Thanks
    109
    Thanked 205 Times in 63 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Aianawa View Post
    Imo bad arguments are important also, as good and bad create belief both ways n more.
    Tactics mean doing what you can with what you have. The greatest enemy of individual freedom is the individual himself. (S.Alinsky)

    What I argumented in the thread text, I am not sure if you have read and understood, So, I would like to highlight crucial points that I think you probably bypass:

    This is the great gap in human understanding. Scientists voluntarily and blindly distance themselves from the deeper and more productive reality of Consciential Evolution even from themselves ..
    ..
    The erratic cold application of Aristotelian and Newtonian concepts, tempered with Cartesianism, has drenched this planet with human blood, notably in the twentieth century.
    ..
    This is the absolute and absurd resistance to interdimensional or multidimensional relative truth.
    ..
    Ambiguities is the thought that progresses beyond the ingenuous logic of current human society, a less precise paradigm that is still contaminated with doubtful dualities that need to be eliminated.
    Last edited by Border Dog, 23rd November 2019 at 19:47.
    ...to the topTop

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Border Dog For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (24th November 2019), sourcetruth (25th November 2019)

  3. #32
    Senior Member Aianawa's Avatar
    Join Date
    18th March 2015
    Posts
    7,621
    Thanks
    33,280
    Thanked 28,854 Times in 7,043 Posts
    Be as a child, bypass the journey of tox n release then why would coming from home to here be purpose ?.
    ...to the topTop

  4. #33
    Senior Member Russian Federation Malisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    14th October 2019
    Location
    Ronin
    Posts
    150
    Thanks
    122
    Thanked 427 Times in 149 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Aragorn View Post
    At this point I would like to remind you that respect is a two-way street, Malisa. Border Dog has not treated you disrespectfully, and he has a language barrier to overcome. I'm sure there are other ways for you to interact and exchange ideas with him than channeling your aggression.
    I'm sorry Aragorn, but my "aggression" is not what you seem to imply

    Maybe it would be better to say "my way to reply to someone's way of leading their way in life is different that mine" is an aggression

    I read a bit how this and honestly what a bother.
    Last edited by Malisa, 24th November 2019 at 08:05.
    ...to the topTop

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Malisa For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (24th November 2019)

  6. #34
    Senior Member Russian Federation Malisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    14th October 2019
    Location
    Ronin
    Posts
    150
    Thanks
    122
    Thanked 427 Times in 149 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Border Dog View Post
    Add Hominem Attack it's not ethical criticism. Unworthiness of the messenger to not validate the message, doesn't work with Intelligence .. try again !

    but before, read carefuly this parts of text (among others related)




    so, I reply you with Art, History and Philosophy ..

    ----

    The Legend of Dreams

    After created the human species, the Gods got into a discussion
    to where put the answers for the issues of life, so that compel
    all men to look for them.

    - We can hide them at the top of the mountains.
    They will never look there, ”said one God".

    "No," said the others.
    - the climbers will find it.

    - We can hide them in the center of the earth.
    "They'll never look there," another suggested.

    "No," replied the others.
    - the miners will find it.

    Then another God said:
    - We can hide them under the sea.
    - They'll never get there.

    "No," said the others.
    - the divers will find it.

    Everyone fell silent, and after some time a wise leader concluded:

    - We should put the answers of the life issues within men.
    - everyone will think it's pointless to look there!

    And so they did ..

    (author unknow)

    ---

    PS - a have no idea what is LMFAO, but I wish it for you too
    Add Hominem Attack it's not ethical criticism.
    There was none Hominem Attack! see? That was your mistake, you already gave answers here

    LMFAO! You talked about how you see this entire world, while pretending you are looking at it from the outside with better wisdom!
    ...to the topTop

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Malisa For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (24th November 2019)

  8. #35
    Senior Member Russian Federation Malisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    14th October 2019
    Location
    Ronin
    Posts
    150
    Thanks
    122
    Thanked 427 Times in 149 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Aragorn View Post
    At this point I would like to remind you that respect is a two-way street, Malisa. Border Dog has not treated you disrespectfully, and he has a language barrier to overcome. I'm sure there are other ways for you to interact and exchange ideas with him than channeling your aggression.

    Looking down on other people because you think they are less knowledgeable than you is disrespect. And he does that, with pride i must say, like here

    Add Hominem Attack it's not ethical criticism. Unworthiness of the messenger to not validate the message, doesn't work with Intelligence .. try again !
    https://jandeane81.com/showthread.ph...#post842016621


    This is his way of thinking, even if you feel i'm worse or he's fine saying this.

    English? That's my third language LOL, i never used that as an excuse to hide away my crap
    Last edited by Malisa, 24th November 2019 at 08:25.
    ...to the topTop

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Malisa For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (24th November 2019)

  10. #36
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    5th November 2019
    Posts
    65
    Thanks
    109
    Thanked 205 Times in 63 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Malisa View Post
    There was none Hominem Attack! see? That was your mistake, you already gave answers here
    SEE ? (veiled treath + underestimating intelligence + ad hominem attack)

    Quote Originally posted by Malisa View Post
    I'm going to explain all your lack of understanding soon, but not today, i'm tired to attempt showing you how bad you go it
    You presume facts are others things, and try to take away my credibility, without any argument for that, but the moral attack intention its clear and indefensible (try again)

    When a statement is challenged by making an ad hominem attack, it is important to draw a distinction between whether the statement in question was an argument or a statement of fact (testimony). In the latter case the issues of the credibility of the person making the statement may be crucial.
    This is kind of embarrassing to explain in public, but since there is an insistence on groundless attacking this thread contents, I think it is better to clarify the facts with some more culture and intelligence, indeed.



    Functional illiteracy are insufficient skills to manage tasks that require intelligent comprehension beyond basic level of reading and writing sentences. It is contrasted with illiteracy in the strict sense, that means the inability to read or write simple sentences in any language.

    Functional illiteracy its an inability of the inteligence use and not the basic understandment of the words used to transmit intelligent comprehension beyond the simple words used to do so.

    The characteristics of functional illiteracy vary from one culture to another, as some cultures require better reading and writing skills than others. For example, a reading level that might be sufficient to make a farmer functionally literate in a rural area, might qualify as functional illiteracy in an urban area of a technologically advanced country.

    The same thing happens in scientific discussions, like this thread proposed, when a person does not understand the intellectual qualities necessary for a good scientific understanding of the subjects under discussion, a functional illiteracy make utterly inappropriate things, and still think their erroneous, unfounded opinions and first myopic impressions are the most correct.

    Last edited by Border Dog, 25th November 2019 at 00:58.
    ...to the topTop

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Border Dog For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (24th November 2019), sourcetruth (25th November 2019)

  12. #37
    Senior Member Aianawa's Avatar
    Join Date
    18th March 2015
    Posts
    7,621
    Thanks
    33,280
    Thanked 28,854 Times in 7,043 Posts
    This really does depend upon If one knows where and how plus why ones education was introduced and forced on most peoples, the Prussian elite n cohorts did a wonderfullll job creating, experimenting and exporting the wests present data intaking and prepping young ones for life, mind you it took N Bonaparte defeating them to then evolve to this platform.
    ...to the topTop

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Aianawa For This Useful Post:

    Border Dog (24th November 2019)

  14. #38
    Senior Member Russian Federation Malisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    14th October 2019
    Location
    Ronin
    Posts
    150
    Thanks
    122
    Thanked 427 Times in 149 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Border Dog View Post
    SEE ? (veiled treath + underestimating intelligence + ad hominem attack)



    You presume facts are others things, and try to take away my credibility, without any argument for that, but the moral attack intention its clear and indefensible (try again)



    This is kind of embarrassing to explain in public, but since there is an insistence on groundless attacking this thread contents, I think it is better to clarify the facts with some more culture and intelligence, indeed.



    Functional illiteracy are insufficient skills to manage tasks that require intelligent comprehension beyond basic level of reading and writing sentences. It is contrasted with illiteracy in the strict sense, that means the inability to read or write simple sentences in any language.

    Functional illiteracy its an inability of the inteligence use and not the basic understandment of the words used to transmit intelligent comprehension beyond the simple words used to do so.

    The characteristics of functional illiteracy vary from one culture to another, as some cultures require better reading and writing skills than others. For example, a reading level that might be sufficient to make a farmer functionally literate in a rural area, might qualify as functional illiteracy in an urban area of a technologically advanced country.

    The same thing happens in scientific discussions, like this thread proposed, when a person does not understand the intellectual qualities necessary for a good scientific understanding of the subjects under discussion, a functional illiteracy make utterly inappropriate things, and still think their erroneous, unfounded opinions and first myopic impressions are the most correct.


    Let's start at the beginning again

    You said

    So, why Science don't research a dream inside itself ?
    And i clearly explained why here
    https://jandeane81.com/showthread.ph...#post842016590
    Tangible things are what science researches, not something we suspect exists somewhere without any way to corroborate and replicate in controlled environments and tests

    So science (as it exists now) is not a road towards an answer for your question
    Is that concise and clear enough?

    Next
    Present Newton Cartezian Conventional science avoids directly researching the Consciousness as an object
    And my very simple reply
    Because consciousness is NOT an object, it is what an object produces as a result of something else

    Consciousness, by itself, is not a thing (object)
    Again, science is not refusing to study consciousness, it simply wasn't mean to study that field, yet.

    You are working from a very basic misconception about what science is, and therefore anything you say afterwards is tainted or can be wrong, because the basic elementary knowledge about what science is has been misunderstood


    If you can't accept that there may be a flaw in what you think, and research it and then rework your mind around the actual facts, then you are not seeking truth at all

    Here, this article may help you understand the actual position of science in regards to consciousness. But if it doesn't, the problem is on your side because the concept is clear enough, no matter what language is being used. The concept of science is the same across any country/language barrier.

    https://www.livescience.com/what-is-...s-mystery.html

    So to clarify again. Science, as it is today, not meant to figure out what consciousness is, or how it works. Science doesn't have the tools to do that, it may have in the future but right now is not by choice that scientists don't research consciousness

    Now, if you find a mistake in you proposal, will you review your own thoughts and understanding or will you find a way around it so that you're still right, even if you have based your words and thoughts in a misconception of what science is?

    Please address directly what i said, don't deviate into a technicality or some other misconception.

    The basis of your post is that science was refusing to do something, i have addressed that directly by explaining that science is NOT avoiding the issue, but rather it is not a scientist job to figure it out

    Please read the article i posted and comment on it

    Thanks

    Quote Originally posted by Border Dog View Post
    SEE ? (veiled treath + underestimating intelligence + ad hominem attack)



    You presume facts are others things, and try to take away my credibility, without any argument for that, but the moral attack intention its clear and indefensible (try again)



    This is kind of embarrassing to explain in public, but since there is an insistence on groundless attacking this thread contents, I think it is better to clarify the facts with some more culture and intelligence, indeed.



    Functional illiteracy are insufficient skills to manage tasks that require intelligent comprehension beyond basic level of reading and writing sentences. It is contrasted with illiteracy in the strict sense, that means the inability to read or write simple sentences in any language.

    Functional illiteracy its an inability of the inteligence use and not the basic understandment of the words used to transmit intelligent comprehension beyond the simple words used to do so.

    The characteristics of functional illiteracy vary from one culture to another, as some cultures require better reading and writing skills than others. For example, a reading level that might be sufficient to make a farmer functionally literate in a rural area, might qualify as functional illiteracy in an urban area of a technologically advanced country.

    The same thing happens in scientific discussions, like this thread proposed, when a person does not understand the intellectual qualities necessary for a good scientific understanding of the subjects under discussion, a functional illiteracy make utterly inappropriate things, and still think their erroneous, unfounded opinions and first myopic impressions are the most correct.

    And by the way, by saying this

    SEE ? (veiled treath + underestimating intelligence + ad hominem attack)
    You are the one placing yourself in that position, since i brought a clear fact that can be verified easily, while you just run around the fact with posts like this. That's as far as i will address your fear of the facts. You only brought a weak statement into this, while ignoring a simple fact, because you don't understand it and refuse to accept your misconception. After that, everything you said is compromised

    Your understanding of "Science" is outdated, face reality and relearn the concepts, then we can have a real conversation
    Last edited by Malisa, 26th November 2019 at 04:43. Reason: double-posted
    ...to the topTop

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Malisa For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (26th November 2019)

  16. #39
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    5th November 2019
    Posts
    65
    Thanks
    109
    Thanked 205 Times in 63 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Malisa View Post
    Again, science is not refusing to study consciousness, it simply wasn't mean to study that field, yet.
    I answered with "Consciousness its an object-abtract" (ie, ESOTERIC),
    and this is enough for your version be bored .. esoterism its a "kind of science"
    (banned, pursuited, marginalized, SECRET .. so, always been much researched)

    conventional science "Refuses", because (power) secret societies don't allow It

    What do you think Secret Societies did for milenia ?
    since Thot (Hermes), are plenty documents about it

    Try Again !

    your (ad hominem) harassment was like that .. instead first arguing to convince, quite say I'm wrong and after try to mend with a lot of death text, and one (or two) faulty thinking.

    Try Again ..

    recommended reading, to next time not make no-one of "these mistakes"
    38 STRATAGEMS to Win a Debate Without Being Right - Schoppenhauer
    Last edited by Border Dog, 26th November 2019 at 08:16.
    ...to the topTop

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Border Dog For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (27th November 2019)

  18. #40
    Senior Member Russian Federation Malisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    14th October 2019
    Location
    Ronin
    Posts
    150
    Thanks
    122
    Thanked 427 Times in 149 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Border Dog View Post
    I answered with "Consciousness its an object-abtract" (ie, ESOTERIC),
    and this is enough for your version be bored .. esoterism its a "kind of science"
    (banned, pursuited, marginalized, SECRET .. so, always been much researched)

    conventional science "Refuses", because (power) secret societies don't allow It

    What do you think Secret Societies did for milenia ?
    since Thot (Hermes), are plenty documents about it

    Try Again !

    your (ad hominem) harassment was like that .. instead first arguing to convince, quite say I'm wrong and after try to mend with a lot of death text, and one (or two) faulty thinking.

    Try Again ..

    recommended reading, to next time not make no-one of "these mistakes"
    38 STRATAGEMS to Win a Debate Without Being Right - Schoppenhauer

    I want you to go through this video, in its entirety, and tell me what's going on there, in terms of growing up and learning how to go beyond what you already learned in the recent past


    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjHKf01G8SU


    Language doesn't matter, here's the finished version of it,


    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uDQ-vbsFFs


    And i posted above the process between starting the song and how it ended up so you can see that mistakes make the master. Look at that session! so many mistakes, so much time, so much frustration, and yet they keep going no matter what, and it's beautiful how it starts to form slowly, little by little pieces here and there.

    If you are going to continue running away with excuses like what you said above, the you should reconsider your stance about what wisdom and knowledge means, because you clearly don't want to listen to anything but your own "truth". You don't get to be a master if you run away from the truth and your own mistakes. I am very clear and simple in my words, yet you run away again from a direct answer

    Did you, or did you not made a mistake in how you assumed science approaches consciousness?

    Success, as it happens, hurts, and you need to go through that, or fail. It's up to you
    Last edited by Malisa, 26th November 2019 at 09:07.
    ...to the topTop

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to Malisa For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (27th November 2019)

  20. #41
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    5th November 2019
    Posts
    65
    Thanks
    109
    Thanked 205 Times in 63 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Malisa View Post
    Did you, or did you not made a mistake in how you assumed science approaches consciousness?
    who made "mistakes", is who NOT LEARNED the recommended reading above, quoted bellow ..

    2. Use different meanings of your opponent's words to refute his or her argument.

    3. Ignore your opponent's proposition, which was intended to refer to a particular thing. Rather, understand it in some quite different sense, and then refute it. Attack something different than that which was asserted.

    29. If you find that you are being beaten, you can create a diversion that is, you can suddenly begin to talk of something else, as though it had bearing on the matter in dispose. This may be done without presumption if the diversion has some general bearing on the matter.
    diverting the subject not make one right, anyway .. Try Again ...

    You just want to ruin the quality of content I posted, and don't want to understand it's out of your reach.

    So, insist to blame the messenger for not having to accept the message (ad hominem attack)

    Try again!
    Last edited by Border Dog, 26th November 2019 at 18:00.
    ...to the topTop

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to Border Dog For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (27th November 2019)

  22. #42
    Senior Member Russian Federation Malisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    14th October 2019
    Location
    Ronin
    Posts
    150
    Thanks
    122
    Thanked 427 Times in 149 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Border Dog View Post
    who made "mistakes", is who NOT LEARNED the recommended reading above, quoted bellow ..



    diverting the subject not make one right, anyway .. Try Again ...

    You just want to ruin the quality of content I posted, and don't want to understand it's out of your reach.

    So, insist to blame the messenger for not having to accept the message (ad hominem attack)

    Try again!
    As expected, you run away!

    I was very basic and specific about my questions, there is no diverting there to anything at all.

    You are a very disappointing person LMFAO

    So much fear to face your reality

    You remind me of this song

    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WVVWXcbBJs


    diverting the subject not make one right, anyway .. Try Again ...

    You just want to ruin the quality of content I posted, and don't want to understand it's out of your reach.
    I posted very specific quotes about what i said, so this never happened. Your words are a very sad way for you to step side my facts. This is a very lamentable situation. You are not a messenger of anything, but at parrot since you don't understand what the message is at all

    And now denial is your only escape LOL

    But you do have something good going for your, you did not bring the "Age Card" against me so far, and i respect that. Because other people, when faced with my questions, told me to go eat my yakool, go have my milk shake or even get go my diapers changed LMFAO!

    Thank you for not going so low as those other persons

    But still, please answer this

    Did you, or did you not made a mistake in how you assumed science approaches consciousness?

    It is important, because if the message is based on a fake argument, then the entire message is compromised and fake. We need to resolve this primary issue about what science means, see?

    No one is shooting the messenger here, we are discussing the basic facts about that message you brought here

    So i would like you expertise on this one. Please tell me how do you feel about my post about science and that article i posted, and how it works against or towards your specific view of science, as you defined in your OP


    Oh and please stop being passive aggressive to me, i have posted clear and plain questions, you keep going into a bad place all along ignoring and avoiding addressing my questions.
    Last edited by Malisa, 27th November 2019 at 08:47.
    ...to the topTop

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to Malisa For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (27th November 2019)

  24. #43
    Administrator Aragorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2015
    Location
    Middle-Earth
    Posts
    15,112
    Thanks
    67,489
    Thanked 63,336 Times in 15,107 Posts
    This thread is going nowhere but down the drain, and I seriously doubt that it would ever get back on track again. I am therefore closing this thread.







    = DEATH BEFORE DISHONOR =
    ...to the topTop

  25. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Aragorn For This Useful Post:

    Aianawa (27th November 2019), Elen (27th November 2019), Fred Steeves (27th November 2019), sourcetruth (28th November 2019), Wind (30th November 2019)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •