Re: Mind's Eye Re: Freewill - A useful myth?

I like the idea of rationality as a weak force Mal - so did Hume.

On Jan 12, 9:12 pm, malcymo <malc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It seems to me that rationality is a week force, only used to justify
> decisions besed on much stronger
> genetically sucessful forces. Education doesn't work because it is
> only tinkering with reason. Too many
> of our evolved mechanisms became ingrained during the mega years we
> were hunter-gatherers. Clearly rathional
> thinking as a persuasive tool is just no good. Advertisers know this.
> I suppose we are going to have to beat the advertisers at their own
> game.
> Environmentalists seem to have something moving with this fear of
> global warming stuff.
>
> On Jan 12, 3:53 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Nietzsche got somewhere near your last statement James - going on to
> > say art was the solution to nihilism.  I don't go for sociobiology
> > much myself to be honest - I just think much we think is specially
> > human turns out not to be as what we know increases.
> > The brain science of the last 20 years has established that
> > rationality usually comes after decision (remember that stuff on
> > interviews being decided in the first 30 seconds?).
> > They've sort of taken that down to the blink of an eye.  Test after
> > test shows that people won't go against the established flow even when
> > simple perception should tell them what the truth is.
> > My interests are in the area of why we can't get more rational
> > alternatives into systems of choice for more widespread decision.
> > Education has broadly failed and I suspect it's really part of the
> > propaganda-influence system.  One assumes free will is free of that
> > kind of trance?  But, of course, a rational system once understood,
> > requires no agent's decision as solutions become obvious and all one
> > could do in free will would be to let this happen or do something
> > wrong.  Most people deny adverts work on them but have homes full of
> > the products.  My grandson wants an I-phone - despite hardly using
> > his current mobile - and claims this is nothing to do with the adverts
> > in which adolescents with them look cool and happy!
> > The original thread question is a good one .
>
> > On Jan 12, 1:28 am, James Lynch <ashkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > It almost sounds like pseudo-ethics as opposed to eugenics (mostly
> > > considered pseudoscience, though I'm not buying into that 100%). Like
> > > Kid Rock says, "You get what you put in, and people get what they
> > > deserve." With the cultural mythos set, centralization of sanctioned
> > > institutions and the erosion of family units to bleed the maximum per
> > > watt of human potential (there's a performance measure for ya Neil :p
> > > ) per individual. But in a world with no actual agency for alternative
> > > outcomes, it would seem that words like "potential" and all the
> > > classical virtues turn to dust. Being skeptical never went so far as
> > > to say that it is all without meaning..
>
> > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 5:19 PM, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Existentialism wandered into over-emphasis on the individual as surely
> > > > as fascism and its 'greater leader' dunnage.  I can see what you mean
> > > > in regard of our more academic learning - though there is good
> > > > evidence now that kids have math concepts before they begin to be
> > > > taught them.  Animals of all kinds pass on learning in their
> > > > communities.  Our aluminium foil space flight reminds me a bit of some
> > > > plant reproductive mechanisms where the seed is tossed out on a wing
> > > > and a prayer (sycamores etc.) - we may have got here in spore form.
> > > > Some algae seem to climb on each other's "backs" before they are
> > > > whipped into the air from a foaming sea and onto the jetstream.  One
> > > > of my own speculations is we may have once been part of a greater
> > > > civilisation that could not defeat problems in speed of light travel
> > > > (space has friction) and so seeded itself into the world we know much
> > > > as dandelions blow in the wind here.  Maybe god is some remnant of
> > > > them, all they could do for our comfort?
>
> > > > On Jan 11, 9:10 pm, malcymo <malc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> Loved Hancock. Yes, IQ tests are obviously culturally based.
>
> > > >> On Jan 12, 5:17 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> > I grew up with Hancock's Half Hour - he was a brilliantly pessimistic
> > > >> > comedian!  Killed himself.  I rather like the gnostic pessimism that
> > > >> > creation is a mistake - one can still build an optimistic life based
> > > >> > on this.  I don't go for it myself - the idea is best read in Rosak's
> > > >> > "Flicker" which made me laugh my Hancock off.
>
> > > >> > Mal - there's some evidence lizards are getting smarter because of
> > > >> > global warming (seriously).  Even amoeba are highly adapted creatures
> > > >> > that have "learned".  Bushmen in Africa have very low average IQ - but
> > > >> > are we going to pit our IQ against their local intelligence in
> > > >> > surviving in their backyard without our civilized stuff?  Their
> > > >> > intelligence is fitted to their conditions - indeed it's likely
> > > >> > "intelligence" in our sense is linked to not living where the (bad)
> > > >> > infectious diseases are.  Much we attribute  to "genes" and individual-
> > > >> > ethnic  superiority concerns geography, climate and a lot more.
>
> > > >> > Without getting into eternal-TOE stuff we are presumably free to
> > > >> > deconstruct rigsy's glob - though I wonder how many can really make
> > > >> > this choice or have made a choice not to bother.  I guess the big
> > > >> > problem of going with such glob-flow is when it's fascist or contains
> > > >> > "religious reasons" to make women walk about in black bags or have to
> > > >> > suffer "churching" and the like.  Greek epistemology didn't get to
> > > >> > grips with much we now see as freedom.  For that matter, we find what
> > > >> > look like refined, rationalised human mistakes like slavery in some
> > > >> > ant practice and our bodies are evidence we assimilated other life
> > > >> > forms like the Borg in our evolution.  Science is making "gene-
> > > >> > splicing" a   reality.
> > > >> > I guess we have be able to choose between fictions and at bottom I
> > > >> > like the idea of being able to live in choice.  Some fictions prevent
> > > >> > this on a grand scale.  The real issues emerge when one realises that
> > > >> > one wants to insist women don't wear black bags and you might have no
> > > >> > right to tell them not to.  In practice much changes when coercive
> > > >> > authority-hegemony is removed.  At this point I don't consider the
> > > >> > individual as the site of freedom and tend to believe existentialism
> > > >> > hapless.
>
> > > >> > On Jan 11, 12:31 pm, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> > > By the time one is walking down the aisle the trap has been laid. :-)
> > > >> > > It's like joining the army and hoping you don't get killed or maimed
> > > >> > > for life, perhaps, or that your being a soldier will bring everlasting
> > > >> > > peace to our world. Eventually-hopefully- one reasons out the past and
> > > >> > > comes to some understanding- but that's hindsight rather than
> > > >> > > foresight. If we live in a liberal country, we might "get over IT".
>
> > > >> > > I do think we absorb a glob of wishful thinking promoted by religion
> > > >> > > and culture at an early age and as malcymo says, optimists are more
> > > >> > > fun than pessimists and likely to have similar friends- or ones that
> > > >> > > share your delusions. Heaven help the truth-teller! "Sit down! You're
> > > >> > > Rocking the Boat!" (Guys and Dolls)
>
> > > >> > > On Jan 10, 12:56 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> > > > Bringing up Liz reminds me of common experiments in brain science
> > > >> > > > rigsy.  We often think something special about ourselves will beat the
> > > >> > > > average - that our ownb free will or determination etc. will defy
> > > >> > > > statistical reality - as in
> > > >> > > > Ask a bride before walking down the aisle "How likely are you to get
> > > >> > > > divorced?" and most will respond "Not a chance!" Tell her that the
> > > >> > > > average divorce rate is close to 50 percent, and ask again. Would she
> > > >> > > > change her mind? Unlikely. Even law students who have learned
> > > >> > > > everything about the legal aspects of divorce, including its
> > > >> > > > likelihood, state that their own chances of getting divorced are
> > > >> > > > basically nil. How can we explain this?
>
> > > >> > > > Psychologists have documented human optimism for decades. They have
> > > >> > > > learned that people generally overestimate their likelihood of
> > > >> > > > experiencing positive events, such as winning the lottery, and
> > > >> > > > underestimate their likelihood of experiencing negative events, such
> > > >> > > > as being involved in an accident or suffering from cancer. Informing
> > > >> > > > people about their statistical likelihood of experiencing negative
> > > >> > > > events, such as divorce, is surprisingly ineffective at altering their
> > > >> > > > optimistic predictions, and highlighting previously unknown risk
> > > >> > > > factors for diseases fails to engender realistic perceptions of
> > > >> > > > medical vulnerability. How can people maintain their rose-colored
> > > >> > > > views of the future in the face of reality? Which neural processes are
> > > >> > > > involved in people's optimistic predictions?
>
> > > >> > > > We have some fair answers to some of this, but Catch 22, telling
> > > >> > > > people is unlikely to affect them!
>
> > > >> > > > On Jan 10, 3:41 pm, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> > > > > Which reminds me of a quote (Liz Taylor?) that she would do the same
> > > >> > > > > things all over again but with different people.
>
> > > >> > > > > How are you measuring these societies? Certainly seems like evils
> > > >> > > > > persist in secular societies as
>
> ...
>
> read more »