559: Not every question is a real question

What has happened in Paris yesterday, forces us to think about it again, what goes on in a human mind, that motives him to commit such crimes?

.

When we are dealing with psychopaths, serial killers, kleptomanes, sex criminals, we have a legion of psychiatrist, who claim they can treat them.

.

Our prison system  has special psychiatric programs for such people, but when three men murder 12 people in cold blood yelling “Allah Akbar” we are at a loss.

.

These criminals aren’t all of a sudden no psychiatric patients, but terrorists or more specific religious fanatics. So, in fact normal human beings with a religious twist.

.

Dawkins is pretty extreme in his ideas. He calls religion a virus, that makes our mind ill, in fact. In other words, I guess you might say, that religion is a disease in his opinion.

.

But that is not what I find interesting philosophically. That is just a conclusion of an analysis. And what I want is to dig into that analysis, the method of how to get to these conclusions.

.

The point is that a debate between an atheist and a believer makes no sense at all, leads to nothing. They both want to convince the other of their rightness.

.

That is not what I find worth while to waste your time on. What I am wondering about  is  the question “WHY is there atheism?”

.

In our youth we may have listened to many fairy tales. Even got scared in the dark, because the evil witch could be hiding behind that door……

.

But yet, there is not something heavily debates like “awitchism” or “agnomism”. Ok, your father of mother read the the tales for you from a thick book, but they were just fairy tales.

.

Now we can ponder about the question “Do gnomes and fairies exist?” You’d better not use this question in Google, for then you get at least 389.00 hits within 0.19 seconds.

.

Compare that with the search key “Atheism”. There you only get 371.000 hits in 0.39 seconds. Really, these are all such peculiar observations.

.

Let’s study these two questions:  “Do gnomes and fairies exist?” and “Do god or gods or God exist?”.  The first one you look at with a smile.

.

The second one however strikes quite an other chord and yet these are two equivalent questions. And that is my first point in how I look at atheism.

.

Syntax refers to the actual way in which words and sentences are placed together in the writing. When I write my LSL scripts I occasionally get a “syntax error in line..” warning.

.

It means, that I didn’t put together the words in such away that it represented proper information for the computer, or actually compiler.

.

The sentence "The man drives the car" would follow normal syntax in the English language. By changing the syntax to "The car drives the man", the sentence becomes peculiar

.

Now, let me ask you: “Does the petrapolus walk around with a pristy or a padapoy?” I guess you would frown. At least you woud understand, that I ask a question.

. 

The syntax of my statement  tells you that, but what am I asking? “petropulus”, “pristy”, “padapoy”, what should those words mean?

.

No idea, but you still know, that it is a question. You would smile and just ask…what should those words mean? I would answer:

.

I don’t know, I just made them up, but it IS a real question, so, I thought, maybe you have an answer (just joking:-)

.

In other words, you can put words together in a syntactical correct order by which they form a question, but the content of the question can make no sense as in mine.

.

And in that sense, the question “Do god or gods or God exist?” is syntactically correct and contrary to my question, this question is seriously debated.

.

Well most of the time the question “Does God exist?”, but what I observe in this debate is, that nobody seems to bother about its content.

.

That is, it seems that the content seems completely lucid and obvious and when you ask Google, you’ll get at least 193.000.000 hits in 0.50 seconds.

.

Have you ever wondered about the amount of implied answers the question “Does God exist?” assumes?

.

Thank you… ^_^

The Discussion

herman Bergson: So....the issue of today is...

Daruma Boa: and that gives e the hope, that peeps believe in miracles

Daruma Boa: and that things beyond our imagination can happen

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): :-)

herman Bergson: that when a sentence has a proper syntactical structure, it does not yet mean that the sentence has meaning

herman Bergson: So…the question "Does god exist?" is syntactically correct....

Piedra Lubitsch: syntactically?

herman Bergson: but to assume that it also has meaning is way to far ...

Piedra Lubitsch: grammatically is correct

Corona Anatine: the last two words present deep problems

Daruma Boa: *GIGGLES* :)~~~~

herman Bergson: syntx is another word for grammar

Piedra Lubitsch: so grammatically is correct

Corona Anatine: yes i was thinking of 'god' and 'exist'

Piedra Lubitsch: since it is a question

herman Bergson: yes...syntactically or grammatically...that is the same in my opinion

Piedra Lubitsch: and no

vladimir Hoxley: colourless green ideas sleep furiously

Piedra Lubitsch: god as showed in religions such as catholic doesn't

Piedra Lubitsch: is a fantasy character

Piedra Lubitsch: to me

herman Bergson: Ahh a classic Vladimir

Piedra Lubitsch: in my humble opinion

Corona Anatine: but that is not 'god'

herman Bergson: Hold on.....

Kai Boissay: i don't think you can say that God only exist Syntactically because that can make us either Agnostics or Atheists, and to be an Athiest i would hope you have reached a higher advanced level in science.

herman Bergson: here some are already talking about "god"/.....

Daruma Boa: its no fantasy. god is something in ourselfves. we are god. in my opinion

Corona Anatine: wel the term has yet to be accurately defined hence 'god'

herman Bergson: In my previous lecture I asked to watch two videos....to make my starting point....

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): we can use the words higher power

Piedra Lubitsch: yes, talking of god as a term, noun

Corona Anatine: that is waffle Dauruma

Piedra Lubitsch: and obviously since it is a word, the idea of it

Piedra Lubitsch: the abstract

herman Bergson: Sorry...but the debate here is not about what you call god at the moment....

Corona Anatine: it is almost as if 'god' had too many meanings

herman Bergson: It is about the fact that you can formulate a question....

vladimir Hoxley: what were the videos hermann?

Daruma Boa: ;-) I always did.

herman Bergson: but that that not automatically implies that the question has meaning

herman Bergson: you can find the links for the videos in the blog...

vladimir Hoxley: ok thanks

Piedra Lubitsch: http://www.britannica.com/search?query=god

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): I watched it and was not that shocked

Daruma Boa: Hooo!! Hooo!! Hooo!!

Daruma Boa: Hooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Daruma Boa: Hooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!! eolene

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): the second one that is

Daruma Boa: hi chilli

Corona Anatine: the question is - why is there atheism -that has an easy answer - because not everyone has a pareidolic brain

herman Bergson: ok....then we are done here Corona :-))

Piedra Lubitsch: pareidolic brain, what is that?

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ LOL ♥

Corona Anatine: well it can be debate as a point made

Corona Anatine: just cos i put forward an idea does not make me correct

Piedra Lubitsch: but what is that?

Piedra Lubitsch: brain thing

herman Bergson: Well...let's stick to the issue of when a question makes sense....what condition have to be met...

Corona Anatine: to do with pareidolia - the seeing of images in other shapes

Corona Anatine: such as jesus in water stains

herman Bergson: as I said....ever thought about the number of answers already assumed by the question "Does god exist?"

Corona Anatine: too many to count i suspect herman

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): of course

Piedra Lubitsch: lolol

Piedra Lubitsch: paranoia

herman Bergson: So to understand this question we first have to dig up the assumed answers

Piedra Lubitsch: non believer here?

Piedra Lubitsch: none a person that is a believer here?*

Daruma Boa: i think also a non believer thinks something

herman Bergson: Whether you believe or not is not the issue here Piedra....

Piedra Lubitsch: thinks what?

Piedra Lubitsch: he suspects?

herman Bergson: philosophically uninteresting....

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): I would recommend that if we cannot attend a class we all read the blog of that previous class b4 we go to the next one

Piedra Lubitsch: I was saying to get another points of view

Kai Boissay: Regardless of what an individual can think of "God" existence, i believe that everyone should have Faith and that is just a great feeling.

Corona Anatine: the problem with believing or not believing in 'god' is that 'god' has yet to be defined so either stance is actually impossible

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): it would clarify some propositions

Daruma Boa: he has others thoughs.

herman Bergson: Good point Gemma....

herman Bergson: seems to be the URL..

herman Bergson: it is :-))

herman Bergson: And one thing is most important....

herman Bergson: you have to have seen the videos

vladimir Hoxley: i think the both the words 'god' and 'exist' are problematic

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): daruma

Corona Anatine: they are

Daruma Boa: ja been crashed

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): yes

herman Bergson: oh yes Vladimir...!

Eolene Uralia: I think quotes make statements mean more

Arabela (aarrabella) is online.

herman Bergson: Can you elaborate onthat Eolene?

vladimir Hoxley: back to kant and his refu

utation of the ontological argument

herman Bergson: We'll get to that Vladimir ^_^

Eolene Uralia: When someone types something and they put in"THIS"  it holds so much more weight with people..  means so much more

vladimir Hoxley: ok sorry

herman Bergson: I see...

Daruma Boa: aloha rodney

herman Bergson: Welcome rodney....in time this time :-))

Rodney Handrick: Hi Daruma

Rodney Handrick: Hey Herman

herman Bergson: But I think that Vladimir said the right thing...

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): hi rodney

Rodney Handrick: Hi Gemma

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ LOL ♥

herman Bergson: the concepts "god" and "exist" are the problematic ones in the question

herman Bergson: To begin with....

Corona Anatine: does also has its share of problems

herman Bergson: the word god....

herman Bergson: to what does it refer in the question...

Corona Anatine: no one actually knows

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): could be the word itself

herman Bergson: a person, a thing, a supernatural something....but then...what is supernatural....???

herman Bergson: and so on.....

Chilli Cao: a feeling?

herman Bergson: and then "exist"....

Corona Anatine: also more than one meaning of the word 'god'

herman Bergson: does it mean...you can see it, touch it?

herman Bergson: if not in what sense then?

Chilli Cao: spiritual

herman Bergson: if it only exists in my brain...what does "exist" mean then?

Corona Anatine: an unhelpful definition

Eolene Uralia: it is in your heart, vs. your head

vladimir Hoxley: bit like the number 4, does it exist/

vladimir Hoxley: ?

Daruma Boa: it exists for any human, when we think about it

Piedra Lubitsch: lol

Daruma Boa: human

herman Bergson: My heart has no brains Eolene :-)

Daruma Boa: our brain is what we think what we are#

herman Bergson: So you mean that the brain creates existence, Daruma?

Piedra Lubitsch: in fact there was an article recently it said heart functions similarly to the brain

Daruma Boa: it creates our worls

Piedra Lubitsch: so could be another one

Eolene Uralia: 4 with asians, in my city...  people are removing this number 4 frim their address...  there is a fire and the fire and police can not find number 4...  it resembles a symbol of death in Chinese writing

Daruma Boa: that is another question

Daruma Boa: what existance is

Corona Anatine: but if 'god' is just a thing in the mind - how does it differ from imagination

Eolene Uralia: so they removed number 4 on their homes

Daruma Boa: what is the matrix?^^

Piedra Lubitsch: ooh

herman Bergson: Well, I think you get my point...

herman Bergson: we won't answer all questions here...

Mikki Louise Dover (mikkilouise) is online.

herman Bergson: but these are the questions you have to think about

Eolene Uralia: but will you have the answer

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): I think it is going to be hard at every class to not go back to the same questions every time

Corona Anatine: chinese arithmetic must be a nightmare for the superstitious

Daruma Boa: true;-) I do.

herman Bergson: To some extend, I dare to say "yes" Eolene...

Eolene Uralia: I am telling you though, removing 4 from your address has caused a lot of problems...  houses burn and pepple die from this

Eolene Uralia: and maybe go to god

herman Bergson: and again....for that you have to watch those youtube videos...to begin with

Piedra Lubitsch: lol

Daruma Boa: the one with the babies was very interesting

bergfrau Apfelbaum: video 1 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcJxRqTs5nk 

                                 video 2 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRvVFW85IcU\

herman Bergson: yes Daruma....very telling too!

Piedra Lubitsch: I can't see the blog link..

herman Bergson: thank you Bergie ^_^

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): i was not that shocked

Daruma Boa: ;-)

Piedra Lubitsch: thank you bergfrau!

CONNIE Eichel is offline.

bergfrau Apfelbaum: and the blog --> http://thephilosophyclass.blogspot.co.at/

herman Bergson: It would be really worrying if you were shocked Gemma :-))

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): lol

Corona Anatine: thanks Bergfrau - saved for later viewing

Rodney Handrick: A TED presentation

herman Bergson: Well...I guess you got homework enough now...:-)

bergfrau Apfelbaum: yw:-)

herman Bergson: So...may I thank you all for your participation again....

Daruma Boa: Tuesday we meet again

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ty

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): hopes to be here on time

Daruma Boa: thank you herman

Ciska Riverstone: thank you herman ㋡

.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): lot's of homework to do ㋡

herman Bergson: See you all next Tuesday again...same time ..same place :-)

herman Bergson: Class dismissed :-)

bergfrau Apfelbaum: ty herman & class!

Ciska Riverstone: ㋡

vladimir Hoxley: glad to be back hermann, been a while for me

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): Bye, Bye  ㋡ 

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): for now

herman Bergson: But you are free to stay and talk as long as you like here, of course

Daruma Boa: all of you a happy weekend.

Rodney Handrick: By eGemmas

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): that looks like one of the cake hats

Piedra Lubitsch: for next week, no, man is not good by nature

Daruma Boa: and think about who is god;-)

Piedra Lubitsch: period

Piedra Lubitsch: lolol

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): lemon

Piedra Lubitsch: just in case I can't make it

Daruma Boa: +u

Ciska Riverstone: happy weekend

Corona Anatine: who - what surely

Ewa Aska is offline.

herman Bergson: who or what Daruma....the question already implies an answer

Corona Anatine: who assumes 'god' has sentience

.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): thank you Herman..see you soon

herman Bergson: Vladimir...where did that sentence came from........

Corona Anatine: whereas any god that exists would liklely not share human idea of sentience

vladimir Hoxley: in the end i always end up back to spinoza on the god question

herman Bergson: the one you quoted

vladimir Hoxley: it was chomsky

Eolene Uralia: is this over?

herman Bergson: Yes I can understand that Vladimir

Piedra Lubitsch: bye

Piedra Lubitsch: see you+

herman Bergson: Ahh....I know the sentence....but forgot for m where

Rodney Handrick: bye

vladimir Hoxley: to show that you can have syntactic content without semantic

herman Bergson: exactly!!!

herman Bergson: My point of today ^_^

Corona Anatine: "where is that little fishy"

herman Bergson: That is so funny about the question "Does god exist?"

vladimir Hoxley: glad to be of service hermann ;)

Corona Anatine: an extremely deep three words Herman

Eolene Uralia: vlad, who are you servicing?

herman Bergson: Nobody questions the semantical content of it...

vladimir Hoxley: ooh missus wouldn’t you like to know:)

Corona Anatine: would does god exist ! be better?

Corona Anatine: ! not ?

herman Bergson: It really amazes me.....

Eolene Uralia: I am confused, I thought that this was about god... existing ...  not about servicing avatars.  0-0

Eolene Uralia: o-o

herman Bergson: drop the question and everybody joins in in the debate....

herman Bergson: What do you mean Eolene?

Corona Anatine: not its not about god existing but what the words exist and god even mena to start with

herman Bergson: This is not about god....this is about the syntactic and semantic characteristics of a question and its implications :-)

Corona Anatine: herman as ever takes a step back to see the larger picture

herman Bergson: That is why I asked the question...Why is there atheism? :-))

Corona Anatine: thank you Herman for making a point that has been of interest a lot clareaer

Corona Anatine: *clearer

herman Bergson: I collected up to now more than 11 Gb of documentation for this project :-))

Corona Anatine: there is atheism because that question is problematic

Corona Anatine: is that all you could find Herman [lol]

herman Bergson: So funny....google Does god exist and you get 193.000.000 hits!!!!!

herman Bergson: No corona....I made just a selection :-))

Corona Anatine: : )

Corona Anatine: the question of what is 'god' probably has as many answers as humans on the planet

herman Bergson: Another funny thing in the whole debate is, that it is so Euro-American centered....

vladimir Hoxley: I guess herman in my experience it is atheists who think they understand those words god and exist and reject them, rather than recognise the problems with the terms

herman Bergson: That si my problem Vladimir....

herman Bergson: Because when you do not see the problems with the concepts the whole ensuing debate is nonsense

Corona Anatine: wel a lot of the other areas -for example islam don’t even get near the question

Corona Anatine: while to hindu the concept of a single deity would be fairly meaningless

Chilli Cao: so we are generating questions about the words in the question ?

Corona Anatine: yes

Corona Anatine: that is the idea

herman Bergson: If you ask the question...it is always the christian god which is supposed to be the subject of the debate...

vladimir Hoxley: it is why I actually describe myself as being on the atheistic wing of agnosticism, in the end it comes down to how you live your life

Ruby Rossini is online.

herman Bergson: never Zeus of Jupter or Amon Ra or Vishnu or Brahman

Corona Anatine: does it ?

herman Bergson: so silly

herman Bergson: so true vladimir.....

Corona Anatine: well amon Ra does exist because it was sun worship

Eolene Uralia: ok I am off the phone

herman Bergson: But now and then you read that atheists find agnostics whimpies....

Corona Anatine: although given a anthopomorthic aspect

Eolene Uralia: and now I can partale in this discussion

Ciera Bergman is online.

vladimir Hoxley: i know hermann, and i find them so simplistic

herman Bergson: You can do whatever you like in the debate Eolene...

herman Bergson: lol.....Vladiir...guess we are form the same school

Eolene Uralia: thank you herman, I was just observing your avatar

Eolene Uralia: you could pass for muslim or jewish in  your cartoon appearance

herman Bergson: the way atheists treat the question "Does god exist?" is an example of their simplicity inmany cases :-))

Eolene Uralia: so you have a faith or are you just you

Chilli Cao: but.. they are atheists

Chilli Cao: they would not be called atheists if they didnt have a clear belief in the answer

herman Bergson: In fact Eolene...I am a cartoon of the Prophet.....^_^

Eolene Uralia: which [rofit might that be>

Eolene Uralia: ?

herman Bergson: Muhammed....or what is his name

Eolene Uralia: lol

Corona Anatine: hmm best be careful then herman

Chilli Cao: i say yes, god exists

Corona Anatine: look what happened to that filmmaker

Chilli Cao: and i can prove it by the process of elimination

herman Bergson: I still have my PEN, Corona!!!!!

Eolene Uralia: ok, so I have a question

Corona Anatine: lol

herman Bergson: Go ahead Eolene

Corona Anatine: i can prove god' does not exist mathematically

vladimir Hoxley: absolutely right hermann, and when you debate with them they think you are just woolly. so i then ask them whether mathematics exists and after a while that shuts them up ;)

Chilli Cao: the process of elimination is a mathematical process too

Eolene Uralia: what would you say to this.  someones grandmothers died on their 96th birthday and is burried 3 days later....  on the day of the reception there is a blue light that comes through the window and 18 people see this

Ewa Aska is online.

Chilli Cao: the known "Εις άτοπον απαγωγή"

Eolene Uralia: are they all crazy or is it spititual thing

Corona Anatine: by by process of elimination would only need on emor estep and god is eliminated

Eolene Uralia: was she saying good bye

herman Bergson: Eis atopon apagoge..?

Chilli Cao: its greek for "the process of elimination"

Chilli Cao: reductio ad absurdum

herman Bergson: Sorry...my greek has deteriorated a little Chilli :-))

vladimir Hoxley: Eolene - Hume has the answer to that

herman Bergson: But back to Eolene's question...plz

Eolene Uralia: thank yo chilli. you are clearly a spritual person and kind as well/

Corona Anatine: the blue light could be many things - spontaneous human commbustion for example

vladimir Hoxley: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence

Eolene Uralia: and what is your answer. vlad, accoring to hume and yes, please continue herman

Corona Anatine: the same is true for any 'vision' of 'god'

herman Bergson: well Eolene....

herman Bergson: the answer is....the post hoc propter hoc fallacy...

herman Bergson: this means....

herman Bergson: and some people then are ...without reason...inclined to say.....event B was caused by event A....

herman Bergson: that event A happens.....somewhat later even B happens.....

Corona Anatine: 'spiritual' is another word with many problems attached to its meaning

Eolene Uralia: herman, is your first language english?

herman Bergson: No it isn't eolene

Corona Anatine: exactly right Herman

Corona Anatine: a causal fallacy

Eolene Uralia: ok, just checking....  some times I do not understand and wonder if I need to look up words

herman Bergson: Why do you ask...? :-) I smy english so bad? "=_

Eolene Uralia: not bad, just some words do not exist and I wonder if I need to look it up

herman Bergson: ok:-)

Eolene Uralia: I understand if I know that it is not your first language

Ewa Aska is offline.

Eolene Uralia: just saves me some time

Eolene Uralia: :)

Chilli Cao: which word

herman Bergson: Throw all in Google Translate Eolene :-)

Corona Anatine: 'god ' maybe

Eolene Uralia: propeter...  I did not know this word

Corona Anatine: that is a word which if often hard to transalte

vladimir Hoxley: Herman's English is excellent - he is Dutch :) the stuff you are not getting is Greek

herman Bergson: I must admit that I overlooked two annoying errors in my lecture....

herman Bergson: overlooked

Corona Anatine: the bible has about three or four different words all put into english as 'god'

Eolene Uralia: yes it is very good, which is why I thought it was a word I did not know

Chilli Cao: ".the post hoc propter hoc fallacy..." is latin right

Eolene Uralia: not commonly used in english

herman Bergson: oh yes...that was latin....

vladimir Hoxley: the Dutch speak better R

Eolene Uralia: well I never took latin

Eolene Uralia: :-/

herman Bergson: and I transcribed the greek of Chilli :-))

bergfrau Apfelbaum: None of the so-called gods exist, because we can not see/touch them! But it is up to us, to one or more to believe... if we want :-) This is free belief...

vladimir Hoxley: The Dutch speak better English than we Brits

bergfrau Apfelbaum: BRB

herman Bergson: Well Vladimir....

herman Bergson: I am very Americanized....

Corona Anatine: but is belief necessary - does it serve any useful purpose?

herman Bergson: I can watch American movies without any problem...

herman Bergson: But when I watch the BBC for instance I really have to concentrate

bergfrau Apfelbaum: back....

herman Bergson: Such a different english from american english

Peli (peli.dieterle) is online.

Corona Anatine: okies i make a move and go watch the two videos

vladimir Hoxley: That's interesting. when i watched 'The Wire" I had to have subtitles on

herman Bergson: you should corona :-)

Chilli Cao: Corona

Corona Anatine: good session Herman

herman Bergson: thank you :-)

Chilli Cao: i would like to hear your mathematical elaboration on the subject

Chilli Cao: and compare our notes

Eolene Uralia: I remember I had a friend who was very religious...  and he said to me...  this is when Lady Diana Died...  She was so beautiful and such a good person...  it is so sad... he was really upset....  and I said... Mother teressa died and you do not care....  who did more for the world as a good person    I felt this spoke volumes  about peples beliefs...  beauty = sainthood.  mother teressa...  she was not attractive but did good.  who cared?

Corona Anatine: cya again tusday

vladimir Hoxley: Thanks Herman, glad I came again

herman Bergson: There..Vladimir....you got the same problem too then....just the other way around :-))

bergfrau Apfelbaum: yes herman!! ty! was interesting again!! ... I believe in you!

Eolene Uralia: oh the meeting is done?

bergfrau Apfelbaum: ***** HALLELUJA ******

bergfrau Apfelbaum: lol

herman Bergson: Amen Bergie !!!!!!

bergfrau Apfelbaum: hihi or ENTER

Eolene Uralia: hey berg

bergfrau Apfelbaum: enter is the AMEN in the virtual world

herman Bergson: Welll Eolene....you were lucky and got an extra....

vladimir Hoxley: Eolene - I would dispute whether Mother Teresa was good, read Christopher Hitchens on her

herman Bergson: Usually when I say "Class Dismissed" the session is over

Eolene Uralia: herman, let me just say.....  I brought my gun and clothing, to protect you from the christians for your appearance

bergfrau Apfelbaum: ***** APPPPPPPLLLLAAAUUUSSSSEEEEEEE***********

herman Bergson: And guns arent the favorite attachments here in class :-))

Eolene Uralia: thanks vlad, I will look that up

Eolene Uralia: it has been a most stimulating conversation

herman Bergson: We already saw too much terror coming from those things yesterday

Eolene Uralia: I am sorry I was on the phone for some of it

herman Bergson: Nice outfit, by the way ^_^

Eolene Uralia: yes true herman...  I worried for you and christian retaliation...  just know as a non ,muslim...  I was here.

Eolene Uralia: thank you herman

herman Bergson: You are welcome Eolene :-)

Chilli Cao: thank you for the subject herman

Eolene Uralia: it was a pleasure

Chilli Cao: and the talk :)

bergfrau Apfelbaum: see you all on Tuesday :-)

herman Bergson: The lectures go on chilli

Eolene Uralia: I hope to join in again, when In do not have a phone call

Chilli Cao: are we going to talk about what is god next time

herman Bergson: This is just one of a whole project

herman Bergson: It all will be investigated, indeed chilli

Chilli Cao: ok :)

herman Bergson: Next Tuesday....

herman Bergson: we go on

Eolene Uralia: I do appreciate your avatar herman....  and very timely too

bergfrau Apfelbaum: byebye for now!

558: A Philosopher looks at Atheism

First of all  I like to welcome you and share with you my wish that this will be an interesting and educating year again.

Just last week, December 30, there appeared an article in my newspaper with the heading “God is alive and kicking in modern philosophy”.

This made me frown, since it hasn’t been the case since The Enlightenment, say since 1650. And hadn’t Nietzsche not told us, that god was dead?

Well,  some was explained when I checked who the authors of the article were: two teachers of the Department of Philosophy of the “Vrije Universiteit”, the protestant university in Amsterdam. (I am Dutch, by the way:-)

January second there were, of course, two articles as a reply to this article. The fist one opens with the sentence: “Funny how two philosophers of the VU can claim that God is alive and kicking in modern philosophy”.

The second is even funnier. The author opens with the story of the Japanese soldier Hiroo Ononda,  who stayed on his post till 1974 although the war was over since August 1945.

His former commander had to talk to him personally to convince him that the war was over. Onoda died in peace last year, 2014.

The author criticizes the article of the VU philosophers regarding “the war” against god and ends with the sentence: “ Could somebody be so kind and inform the VU philosophers that  the war is over?

I decided to start this project as a consequence of my previous project on philosophy of science. When you read my lectures 538, 539 and 540 you’ll see, how the seed is planted there already… :-)

And as you may have concluded from the newspaper articles I referred to, there seems to be a debate going on right now, even such a debate that my newspaper is willing to publish such articles.

I know that for some people atheism is a very sensitive subject, so we have to find a way to deal with it even tho it may strike some sensitive chords.

This is the reason, why I explicitly have named this project “A Philosopher looks at Atheism”. The emphasis will be on the philosophical method to address this subject.

It means that we are not at all interested in whether you are a believer in god or not or even hate or love religion. Philosophy begins with wonder and in my case, I wonder about the  question “Why is there atheism?”

And believe me, it is a question that makes sense. Especially because in relation to atheism there are so many weird things philosophically and mutatis mutandis in relation to religion as well.

With “weird things” I mean issues that are beyond rationality or logic or even common sense. Take for instance this report, “Freedom of Thought 2014”. Free download here http://freethoughtreport.com/download-the-report/

Take the subtitle “A Global Report on the Rights, Legal Status and Discrimination Against Humanists, Atheist and Non-religious”. 

Isn’t that weird: Humanists, Atheist and Non-religious. Are these three different but yet equivalent categories? I mean, I assume that humanists and atheists are non-religious by definition, and yet they are mentioned as separate categories.

Does that mean, that you can be non-religious and yet not a humanist or an atheist? And isn’t a humanist by definition an atheist? And why is the agnostic not mentioned here?

I think, we have to sort this out philosophically, for in my opinion something isn’t right here. We HAVE to dig into the semantics here and analyze the meanings of these terms in relation to one another.

But you can get it even weirder. In my introductory lecture before the Holidays I quoted Joseph Lewis, what he said in 1960 in  an address over the radio:

“Atheism is a vigorous and a courageous philosophy. It is not afraid to face the problems of life, and it is not afraid to confess that there are problems yet to be solved.”

Philosophically this sounds really weird, but I regarded it as some amusing caricature: “vigorous and courageous” ?

So weird, but I had to discover that I was wrong.

Just take this quote: “Being an atheist is nothing to be apologetic about. On the contrary, it is something to be proud of, standing tall to face the far horizon, for atheism nearly always indicates a healthy independence of mind and, indeed, a healthy mind.”

This you can read in the preface of Richard Dawkin’s “The God Delusion” (2006). Nothing has changed since 1960 here, it seems.

As a philosopher, I think I would call myself an empiricist, who cherishes logic and rationality as tools of philosophical method.

But to call empiricism or any philosophy a vigorous and a courageous philosophy…. or to tell myself that I should be proud of being an empiricist. Totally nuts :-)

This leads for me to the question “Is atheism something more than a philosophical stand, based on clear logic and arguments?”

And this is only the tip of the iceberg.But let me show you what I’d like to regard as my down to earth starting point.

Let me quote Frans de Waal frorm the first chapter of “The Bonobo and the Atheist”

“Why not assume that our humanity, including the self-control needed for a livable society, is built into us? Does anyone truly believe that our ancestors lacked social norms before they had religion?”

To conclude my lecture you have to do some homework. It will take you 16 minutes and 32 seconds. Take your time and watch a video now and after that we can have some discussion.

After the discussion you have real homework and HAVE TO watch video 2

Watch now video 1:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcJxRqTs5nk

Watch later video 2:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRvVFW85IcU\

The Discussion

herman Bergson: Mandatory!

Chantal (nymf.hathaway): Between the lines... he was in Masterclass (Dutch tv) this year... and a delight to listen to

herman Bergson: of course!

jaynine Scarborough is online.

Chantal (nymf.hathaway): (Bookmarked nr 2 as well, I need to turn in Herman, was a rough day for me, Huggles)

Chantal (nymf.hathaway): Waves at everyone and poofs

Roger Amdahl: seen it ...

Daruma Boa: me too

herman Bergson: ok :-)

Gemma Allen throws cucumbers at everyone

Daruma Boa: *GIGGLES* :)~~~~

herman Bergson: lol

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): book marked the other

herman Bergson: yes...you HAVE TO watch the other too....

.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): bookmarked it too

Roger Amdahl: I like to start with explaining my opinion that for any religion it is absurd to claim they the inventors of morality. I think of religion ( not faith) as an institution that poisons everything with their false claims about truth and morality

herman Bergson: it is essential evicence...

herman Bergson: Hold on Roger...;-)

Roger Amdahl: ok :))

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): i don’t think that most religions set out to do that tho but

herman Bergson: Those words of yours are classics....of course :-)

herman Bergson: But an important point in them is indeed the relation between morality and religion....

herman Bergson: When you have seen the second video you’ll have clear proof that that relation is not justified by facts.

herman Bergson: As de Waal says...do you really believe that our ancestors hadn’t social values ?

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): cain and abel sure didn’t

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): well cain didn’t

Daruma Boa: no of curse i don’t believe that. never did.

herman Bergson: yeah...ice couple and easily forgotten by christians...

herman Bergson: nice

herman Bergson: But one the the claims against atheism is...that there can be no morality without god...

Roger Amdahl: How would Moses ever had reached the foot of Mount Zion, (10 commandments) it the people didn't know that they should not steel, kill and betray each other. do you really think when Moses got down with the tablets they says: Oh .. that is how we do it .. it is absurd

herman Bergson: you read that everywhere as one of the refutations of atheism...

Daruma Boa:  the christians had a lot to write to make everyone believe in what they want them to believe

Roger Amdahl: That is a truly false statement Herman .. Morality is not from the church .. it is our need to survive as a group

herman Bergson: lol....I havent read that one Roger...but it is a good one :-)

herman Bergson: Roger...de Waal shows in his experiments that even primates have some sense of fairness...

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): of course or they could not live in groups

Roger Amdahl: Look on you tube for "Chistopher Hitchens".. He has some neat things to say about religion.. He can say it in a way I never could .. this is a must see too

herman Bergson: Just watch the second video....you will be surprised!

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ LOL ♥

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): not sure we will

Roger Amdahl: BTW Christopher Hitchens is a very good friend of Richard Dawkins you mentioned before

herman Bergson: yes Rogr, Hitchens is on my list, don’t worry :-))

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): he has died tho yes??

Roger Amdahl: Good :)))

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): did he not die last year ?

herman Bergson: yes in 2011

Roger Amdahl: Yes .. Chistopher is no more amongst us

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ah that long

herman Bergson: Gott cancer....

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): he is still often quoted

Sparkle Kingston (shaycy): there must be some kind of God fear instilled in people not to do wrong and evil. yet i don't believe in any. Religions make people hate each other and kill and fight with each other. So this is the big paradox.

herman Bergson: But...to keep this a clear and open discussion....

herman Bergson: One of my problems with atheism is that all debates you read...or watch on youtube are debates about a christian god...

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): very polluting truck train passing

Roger Amdahl: The fear involved is the bad thing about the church .... Unless you literaly believe what they say, there is no place in heaven for you. That is cheap blackmail.

herman Bergson: which means for instance that for a Hindu these debates are utter nonsense...

Roger Amdahl: The Islamic God is not much better either

herman Bergson: So...I do not waste time on debating what the christian church and its god means in realtion to atheism....

Arabela (aarrabella) is online.

Daruma Boa: some religion people dont think about their religion as we do.

Daruma Boa: in india it is totally common to believe what all believe

herman Bergson: What I want to analyse is what is the meaning of our behavior in general....the inclination to believe in something supernatural....

Daruma Boa: what is that in detail? the supernatural?

Sparkle Kingston (shaycy): it is in our dna to believe in the higher realms.

Roger Amdahl: The reason why I became an atheist is simple .. the unbelievable ignorance of any church to claim they have some knowledge not available to us, the repression of free thought, and the repression of women ( 1/2 the world population)

herman Bergson: THAT, Shaycy , is the real fundamental question....

Daruma Boa: true roger, " ignorance of any church to claim they have some knowledge not availavble to us," and they can not explain most of the things in the bible

herman Bergson: Slow down Roger.....:-)

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): but roger is it necessary to express such contempt alll the time about religion then???

Sparkle Kingston (shaycy): i believe it is so. some people call me an atheist. but in not one. i bleive in a source of all. A creator of the universe and all

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): i know some who have left this class over the years because of that

Sparkle Kingston (shaycy): im*

herman Bergson: In my lecture I said that I was not at all interested in whether you believe in a god or not....

Roger Amdahl: Sparkle... We are almost all afraid to die, it is something strange to us, something unknown... getting anwsers for that situation is in our genes.. it is called intelligence. The need for religion is no where

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): i suggest it be left alone then

Daruma Boa: thats fear

Daruma Boa: not intelligence^^^

herman Bergson: equally I am not al all interested either in who is an atheist here or not....

Sparkle Kingston (shaycy): fear or intelligence or both

herman Bergson: My philosophical question was WHY is there atheism?

Sparkle Kingston (shaycy): i think both

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): yes

Daruma Boa: because we start to think about

Daruma Boa: and we started to choose different

Daruma Boa: beter believing nothing than anything

Daruma Boa: perhaps also fear?

herman Bergson: Ahhh the idea of being afraid to die....a classic....

Roger Amdahl: thinking freely about religion, I became an atheist .. too much nonsense in religion..

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): we get that

herman Bergson: The funny thing is....as Dawkins writes....who are most afraid to die...the religious people or the noon-religious people...

Sparkle Kingston (shaycy): unknown is always scary but also exciting

Daruma Boa: religion is a process of human beings. a try to explain the world

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): hard to say

Daruma Boa: but now we are on the way to find other answers

herman Bergson: As arelious person you should believe that you go over to a better life....

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): some religious accept it as a new life with god

Roger Amdahl: How about : We all made in the image of God , but not you, you are a homosexual, you are an evil person .. ( Catholic church until today) how is that for religion ?

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): non religious accept it as just life and the end

herman Bergson: as a non religious one you should realize you end up in nothingness

Roger Amdahl: as you was before you were born, nobody seems to bother with that Herman

herman Bergson: But statisticallly....the religious people were more afraid to die

Daruma Boa: no wonder^^

herman Bergson: no...they are scared like hell for hell :-))

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): because realize are always breaking the rules

Daruma Boa: when u read the bible, u are the most time of your life afraid to do nothing wrong.

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): right

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): hopes i can make it Thursday

Roger Amdahl: Hell is a story that same church put into world without proof... to blackmail people... But you could still go to heaven if you donated a years salary

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ers have to watch the video

herman Bergson looks at his watch....

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): yes

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...

Daruma Boa: overtime^

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): late !

herman Bergson: I guess youhave plenty of time till then Gemma :-))

.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): interesting lecture Herman

herman Bergson: thank you Beertje...

Daruma Boa: yes indeed!

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): yes

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): and the video was good

Daruma Boa: thank you for that

herman Bergson: Well we stil have a lot of ground to cover...

Daruma Boa: we have now 12 months...

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): the prof looked better now than when young

herman Bergson: Watch the second video....it IS an eyeopener...!

Roger Amdahl: Thank you Herman , sadly I can't be here next time, because of work ..

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥

herman Bergson: and will give you some hope regarding the future possibilities of mankind :-))

Sparkle Kingston (shaycy): as always no answer to really anything

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): maybe the next video

herman Bergson: Thank you all for your participation again..

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): lol'

herman Bergson: Class dismissed ^_^

.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): but lot's to think about again:)

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): Bye, Bye  ㋡ 

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): for now

Daruma Boa: see u thursday. i do my very best to appear°°

Daruma Boa: happy wednesday to all tomorrow

Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): me too

.: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): have a goodnight all

Sparkle Kingston (shaycy): i don't know u but bye to all

557: Introducing a new project: A Philosopher looks at Atheism

Lean back and listen to this: ^_^

.

Atheism is a vigorous and a courageous philosophy. It is not afraid to face the problems of life, and it is not afraid to confess that there are problems yet to be solved. 

.

It does not claim that it has solved all the questions of the universe, but it does claim that it has discovered the approach, and learned the method, of solving them. 

.

Atheism is a self-reliant philosophy. It makes one intellectually free. He is thrilled to enthusiasm by his mental emancipation and he faces the universe without fear of ghosts or gods. 

.

It teaches man that unless he devotes his energies and applies himself wholeheartedly to the task he wishes to achieve, the accomplishment will not be made. 

.

It warns him that any reliance upon prayers, or "divine" help, will prove a bitter disappointment. 

.

To the philosophy of Atheism belongs the credit of robbing Death of its horror and its terror. It brought about the abolition of Hell.-  END QUOTE -

.

These are the words of Joseph Lewis  (1889 – 1968), an American freethinker and atheist activist, During the mid-twentieth century, he was one of America’s most conspicuous public atheists, the other being Emanuel Haldeman-Julius.

.

It was an  address delivered February 20, 1960,

over radio station WIME, Miami, Florida, USA.

.

The text is a bit hilarious in my opinion. Replace the word “Atheism” with “McDonnald’s” or “Buddhism” or “Microsoft”and it still sounds appealing.

.

But it misses my point of this project completely. At least I hope, that at the end of this project, you might come to the conclusion, that atheism isn’t such a philosophy at all.

.

The title of my new project is deliberately “A Philosopher looks at Atheism”. As a philosopher I wonder about the world.

.

And in this case about the mental behavior of homo sapiens and what it means. On the one hand there are those who BELIEVE.

.

On the other hand there are those who do not BELIEVE. Within this context known as theists and atheist, where the title ‘atheist’ in many places has a negative connotation.

.

Of course there are many explanations for this unequal dichotomy, but from a logical or rational point of view, I find it peculiar, worth investigating,

.

because you have  Believers and Unbelievers and ME, for I do not feel at home with either of the two. Certainly not if you take Joseph Lewis as an example of the Unbeliever.

.

So this project is not intended to enjoy religion bashing, but it wants to question the phenomenon itself, analyze its arguments. Take for instance Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris.

.

The basic question is that we are aware of what we call “knowledge” and what we call “belief”. Knowledge and belief are the two ingredients of our mind.

.

When is some thought, put to words in a statement, which can be true or false, a belief?When do we call  it knowledge?

.

We have factual truth, when I say “We are in Second Life here”. We KNOW this. We not just believe it. Just think about the question: Can a belief be true too? 

.

So I ask you to joint me and LOOK at Atheism in a philosophical way, which demands only rationality as the source of your arguments in debates.

.

To quote Betrand Russell:

The question is how to arrive at your opinions and not what your opinions are. The thing in which we believe is the supremacy of reason. 

.

If reason should lead you to orthodox conclusions, well and good; you are still a Rationalist. To my mind the essential thing is that one should base one's arguments upon the kind of grounds that are accepted in science, 

.

and one should not regard anything that one accepts as quite certain, but only as probable in a greater or a less degree. 

.

Not to be absolutely certain is, I think, one of the essential things in rationality.

.

Thank you… feel free to take the floor.. ^_^

.

The Discussion

[13:16] Fitch WoodrunnerFitch Woodrunner picks up the rug and floorboards and runs away

[13:16] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ LOL ♥

[13:16] herman Bergsonherman Bergson grins

[13:16] Bejiita Imako: hahaa, put those back!

[13:16] Dawn Rhiannyr: thank you Herman :)

[13:16] Corona Anatine: Your penultimate statement indicates that those who are certain about god are not rational

[13:16] Bejiita Imako: lol

[13:16] Merlin Saxondale: Well on the subject of certainty, Aleister Crowley wrote a great little pamphlet called "The Soldier and the Hunchback"

[13:16] Fitch Woodrunner: Thank you Herman, you answered a lot of questions I was going to ask

[13:17] Corona Anatine: lol good ol Crow

[13:17] Roger Amdahl: not sure what to discuss right now ..

[13:17] Fitch Woodrunner: specifically about the nature of Belief and Knowledge

[13:17] herman Bergson: Oh that is going to be our primary subject of investigation

[13:17] Corona Anatine: and what did Perdurobo have to say Jakey

[13:17] Gemma Cleanslate: wonders about corona's statement

[13:17] herman Bergson: Tricky one, Gemma :-))

[13:18] Gemma Cleanslate: right

[13:18] herman Bergson: so I just don't say anything yet :-)

[13:18] herman Bergson: That statement is running way ahead of the crowd at the moment....

[13:19] Vigos Lyric: I think that it is true that one who holds a belief to be absolutely true is not approaching that belief rationally, by definition

[13:19] Fitch Woodrunner: If this is the beginning of a series, I'll look forward to the future lectures and hold my questions until then

[13:19] Corona Anatine: wel it would the crowd seems fairly stationary as far as chat is going

[13:19] Gemma Cleanslate: just the beginning

[13:19] herman Bergson: Yes vigos.....

[13:19] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:20] herman Bergson: Which means that we have to look into Belief and rationality......

[13:20] herman Bergson: and into the axiom of the primacy of rationality

[13:20] Corona Anatine: ok going back further - where beleif is concerend - how do we arrive at beleif

[13:20] Fitch Woodrunner: hmm, we should be careful here, tread lightly, so as not to disrespect the various belief systems in the world

[13:21] herman Bergson: No Corona...that is for lecturesto come....

[13:21] Corona Anatine: ok

[13:21] Gemma Cleanslate: that is so right jakey

[13:21] Corona Anatine: i was just trying to folowo from yout earlier notes

[13:21] herman Bergson: No Fitch....we are NOT criticizing beleif systems....

[13:22] Corona Anatine: I show the belief systems of the world the same respect as they sho wto me

[13:22] herman Bergson: that is why I talk of a philosopher LOOKING at atheism....

[13:22] Fitch Woodrunner: Herman, I was not implying you were... I was just remarking that some of the comments could go down that road

[13:22] Vigos Lyric: So to approach something rationally, means what exactly? Is it about accepting that all should not be considered absolutely true while observing what physical systems or systems of thought hold up against scrutiny?

[13:22] herman Bergson: Our primary goal is to evaluate the situation we are in today.....

[13:22] Fitch Woodrunner: agreed

[13:23] Corona Anatine: i would but Herman said i would have to use only half my keyboard if i did

[13:23] herman Bergson: Rationality is an important issue now....yes

[13:23] Corona Anatine: ok then how about - why belief in god but not say fairys or magic

[13:24] herman Bergson: If you look at me previous project on Science...

[13:24] Corona Anatine: what make one belief happen and not antoher

[13:24] herman Bergson: you might assume that scientific thinking is an example of rationality...

[13:24] Bejiita Imako: yes

[13:24] Vigos Lyric: Ideally, I would think so. In practice, perhaps not

[13:24] Vigos Lyric: *not always

[13:24] herman Bergson: And I like to interpret it from a biological and evolutionary point of view

[13:25] herman Bergson: No....the homo sapiens is NOT a rationality driven individual....maybe even far from that....

[13:25] Fitch Woodrunner: "My god has a bigger dick than your god!" -George Carlin

[13:25] Corona Anatine: tho it could be said that science has defined what rationality is

[13:25] Gemma Cleanslate: good old george

[13:25] herman Bergson: But he HAS the gift of rationality......and that seems to work.....

[13:26] Nymf Hathaway: Loves George Carlin ㋡

[13:26] Corona Anatine: that would be a belief too jakey

[13:26] herman Bergson: Science...seen as an axiomatic system, is also based on belief, Corona..

[13:26] Vigos Lyric: If we look at this from a biological perspective, I would say rationality is only a tool that can be used and developed, one of many of our tools as a species to cognitively process the world

[13:26] Corona Anatine: and a small working dick would still be better than a non working large one

[13:27] herman Bergson: I agree Vigos....

[13:27] Bejiita Imako: hehe

[13:27] herman Bergson: plz Corona....stick to the subject :-)

[13:27] Corona Anatine: okok

[13:28] Corona Anatine: what other cognitive tools do you suggest exist

[13:28] herman Bergson: Rationality is a tool of the mind in our interaction with our environment

[13:28] Gemma Cleanslate: a tool that sometimes is not used

[13:28] herman Bergson: I was wonder about that myself too, Corona :-)

[13:29] herman Bergson: Seems you pity that, Gemma :-))

[13:29] Vigos Lyric: So it leads me to consider that rationality and beliefs are not superior to each other but only tools And that the resulting conclusion drawn with those tools (sole one or both in some degree) is simply an interpretation of information, such as: "God exists because I dreamt he came to me." To them, they belief God was in their dreams and attribute that experience to a larger belief system

[13:29] Fitch Woodrunner: and that is the overall problem and why I feel Atheism is a religion, because it is putting its belief in science, which we are still not 100% sure is fact, it is observable reality, it has more umph because you can touch and see the things Science digs up, but there is still doubt. Science is still built on faith that the theory is correct

[13:30] herman Bergson: Gentelmen.....

[13:30] herman Bergson: one point of order....

[13:30] Corona Anatine: so do you favour the 'swiss armyknife ' concept of cognitive mind?

[13:30] herman Bergson: plz read the little sigh at the bottom of this lectern :-)

[13:31] Vigos Lyric: Ahh, apologies

[13:31] Vigos Lyric: Habit of mine to type in large blocks

[13:31] herman Bergson: Yes Fitch....that will be an intersting subject of one of the coming lectures...

[13:32] herman Bergson: Because here you put religeous faith equal to rational faith (in science)

[13:32] Fitch Woodrunner: sometimes my thoughts come out, I'm not necessarily counting words... I will endavour to hit Enter more often :P

[13:32] Gemma Cleanslate: tries to think i short spurts

[13:33] herman Bergson: Yes Fitch...the enter key is perfect :-))

[13:33] Beertje Beaumont: needs another hours to read all this...

[13:33] Gemma Cleanslate: right

[13:33] herman Bergson: Ohh talking about hours....

[13:33] herman Bergson: You will have plenty til January.....:-)

[13:34] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:34] herman Bergson: Because I have offered myself a nice holidays till then :-)

[13:34] Gemma Cleanslate: ahhhhhaaaaa

[13:34] Nymf Hathaway: ㋡ good for you!

[13:34] Roger Amdahl: *smiles .. good one Herman

[13:34] Beertje Beaumont: you deserved it Herman

[13:34] Gemma Cleanslate: so no classes??? 

[13:34] Bejiita Imako: this can be another interesting topic for sure

[13:34] Vigos Lyric: So to examine Atheism specifically (regardless of any association with science), it is solely one perspective among many, theist, atheist, pantheist, etc

[13:34] herman Bergson: Which means that the real atheist fireworks will go off in January after the Holidays :-)

[13:34] Gemma Cleanslate: wow

[13:35] Gemma Cleanslate: nice long break!

[13:35] Bejiita Imako: ok ㋡

[13:35] Fitch Woodrunner: so this was a teaser

[13:35] Gemma Cleanslate: WaaaHaHAhahAHA! AhhhhHAhahhAHhahHAH! haha!

[13:35] Nymf Hathaway: :)))

[13:35] Beertje Beaumont: a big one Jakey:)

[13:35] Gemma Cleanslate: loads of time to think

[13:35] Dawn Rhiannyr: good teaser for sure with much to think about

[13:35] herman Bergson: You got a point Vigos....

[13:35] Fitch Woodrunner: I might steal the walls too

[13:35] Nymf Hathaway: ㋡

[13:36] herman Bergson: Atheism is of course primarily associated with theism....and in particular with Christianity....

[13:36] Nymf Hathaway: do not forget the posters, paintings etc

[13:36] herman Bergson: But that is totally uninteresting for me as a philospher....

[13:36] Vigos Lyric: If we can't be certain of what we know, how can we assert which of those is superior or even correct at all?

[13:36] Fitch Woodrunner: you can keep the art and charts, I already have far too many of both

[13:36] herman Bergson: Oh I have no problem with that Vigos....

[13:37] herman Bergson: Just imagine the next situation....

[13:37] herman Bergson: A huge rock is coming down on you....

[13:37] Vigos Lyric: Nor do I, just positioning the idea of atheism as a concept, a system built on certain presumptions

[13:37] Fitch Woodrunner: why does it need to be superior? are you thinking about declaring war?

[13:37] herman Bergson: One advisor says....pray to god for help

[13:37] herman Bergson: another advisor says....take a few steps aside plz...

[13:38] Merlin Saxondale: Well this sounds like another dilemma.. faith healing

[13:38] Vigos Lyric: Perhaps the application of these different systems are beneficial in different circumstances

[13:38] Vigos Lyric: An atheist might say step away from the point which the rock would collide

[13:38] Merlin Saxondale: and Jehovah's witnesses etc with rules about medical treatment

[13:38] Corona Anatine: there wil always be times when faith healing appears to work

[13:38] herman Bergson: The only thing I want to say here is....that there is a qualitative difference in the advice in relation to surviving

[13:39] Fitch Woodrunner: when it comes to telling a joke in chat, I suggest breaking the bottom rule :)

[13:39] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:39] Vigos Lyric: Then a theist would be able to provide a support system to those grieving lost ones, perhaps

[13:39] Fitch Woodrunner: O.o

[13:39] Corona Anatine: only if they shared the same belief

[13:40] Corona Anatine: if one belief was heaven the other incarnation then the level of comfort would be diminished

[13:40] Fitch Woodrunner: if a proverbial rock is about to crush you where you stand... move!

[13:41] Vigos Lyric: Yes, the details vary there. Theists don't all agree on the nature of things

[13:41] herman Bergson: Well..I must admit.....my idea about the quality of the advise is based on a belief.....!

[13:41] Corona Anatine: ah that explains the fish -you dint move away in time : )

[13:41] Fitch Woodrunner tries to shorten a joke to 2 lines...

[13:41] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ LOL ♥

[13:41] Bejiita Imako: hehe

[13:41] herman Bergson: Namely, that the organism wants to survive

[13:41] Roger Amdahl: sorry ..RL ... thanks Herman , see you all later

[13:42] Gemma Cleanslate: i have to get back before santa sees i am gone too

[13:42] Vigos Lyric: Do you mean the advice to move out of the way is based on a belief the rock will hit the person?

[13:42] Bejiita Imako: ok cu ㋡

[13:42] Ciska Riverstone: happy holiday everyone

[13:42] Ciska Riverstone: thank you hermann

[13:42] Gemma Cleanslate: have a great holiday herman

[13:42] Bejiita Imako: same to you

[13:42] Gemma Cleanslate: you too ciska

[13:42] herman Bergson: lol.....YEs that too Vigos!

[13:42] Corona Anatine: is this your last session till new year herman?

[13:42] Fitch Woodrunner: Flood coming, man says god will save him. 3 attempts to rescue him, man says god will save him. He dies. In heaven man askes god, why? God says, I sent you warnings, a boat and a helicopter!

[13:42] Bejiita Imako: happy holidays to all

[13:43] Gemma Cleanslate: would say happy holidays in the group chat but Herman has it locked!

[13:43] Vigos Lyric: But then a belief can be based on empirical evidence (seeing the rock falling) or...

[13:43] Vigos Lyric: based on thinking it will hit the person?

[13:43] herman Bergson: A nice one Fitch...

[13:43] Nymf Hathaway: Thank you Herman, interesting new subject! Wishes everyone a nice evening :)... vacation even ㋡

[13:43] Gemma Cleanslate: yes

[13:43] Gemma Cleanslate: Bye, Bye  ㋡ 

[13:43] Gemma Cleanslate: for now

[13:43] herman Bergson: Thank you all too :-)

[13:43] herman Bergson: Class dismissed :-)))

[13:43] Nymf Hathaway: ㋡

556: Is there value-neutral science?

Almost everybody would agree that scientific knowledge has sometimes been used for unethical ends in the manufacture of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, for example.

.

But cases such as these do not show that there is something ethically objectionable about scientific knowledge itself. 

‘

It is the use to which that knowledge is put that is unethical. Indeed, many philosophers  would say that it makes no sense to talk about science or scientific knowledge being ethical or unethical per se. 

.

For science is concerned with facts, and facts in themselves have no ethical significance. It is what we do with those facts  that is right or wrong, moral or immoral. 

.

According to this view science is essentially a value-free activity.Its job is just to provide information about world. What society chooses to do with that information  is another matter.

.

Not all philosophers accept this picture of science as neutral with respect to matters of value, nor the underlying fact - value dichotomy on which it rests.

. 

Some argue that the ideal of value-neutrality is unattainable. Scientific enquiry is invariably laden with value judgements. 

.

One argument against the possibility of value-free science stems from the obvious fact that scientists have to choose what to study. Not everything can be examined at once. 

.

So judgements about the relative importance of different possible objects of study will have to be made, and these are value judgements, in a weak sense. 

.

Another argument stems from the fact, that any set of data can in principle be explained in more than one way.  A scientist's choice of theory will thus never be uniquely determined by his data. 

.

Some philosophers take this to show that values are inevitably involved in theory choice, and thus that science cannot possibly be value-free. 

.

A third argument is that scientific knowledge cannot be divorced from its intended applications in the way that value-neutrality would require. 

.

On this view, it is naive to picture scientists as disinterestedly doing research for its own sake, without a thought for its practical applications. 

.

The fact that much scientific research today is funded by private enterprises, who obviously have vested commercial interests, lends some credence to this view.

. 

To conclude, it is inevitable that an enterprise such as science, which occupies so pivotal a role in modern society and commands so much public money, should find itself subject to criticism from a variety of sources. 

.

It is also a good thing, for uncritical acceptance of everything that scientists say and do would be both unhealthy and dogmatic. 

.

It is safe to predict that science in the 21st century, through its technological applications, will impact on everyday life to an even greater extent than it has already. 

.

So the question “Is science a good thing?” or “Is science right?” will become yet more pressing. 

.

Philosophical reflection may not produce a final, unequivocal answer to this question, as we have seen several times,

.

but so far we have tried to isolate key issues and evaluate them in a rational, balanced discussion of them.

.

With this lecture I conclude this project on the Philosophy of Science. Next Thursday I’ll introduce to you the new project: “A Philosopher looks at Atheism”.

.

Thank you…the floor is yours ^_^

.

Main Sources:

MacMillan The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2nd edition

Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 1995

A Historical Introduction to the Philosophy of Science, John Losee (2001)

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, T. Kuhn (1962)

Philosophy of Science - A contemporary introduction, Alex Rosenberg (2005)

Philosophy of Science - A Very Short Introduction, Samir Okasha 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

http://www.iep.utm.edu/

http://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html

The Discussion

[13:17] ZANICIA Chau: thank you Harman

[13:17] Gemma Cleanslate: well

[13:17] Fitch Woodrunner: Thank you Herman!

[13:17] ZANICIA Chau: Herman, sorry

[13:17] Gemma Cleanslate: back where we were i think

[13:17] Corona Anatine: Well a lot of the negative uses come from application during warfare

[13:18] herman Bergson: Yes Gemma...the art of philosophy is finding the right questions....not the ultimate answers :-)

[13:18] Corona Anatine: so that in some ways there are those who argue that a use which shortens a war is a good usage

[13:18] Gemma Cleanslate: as usual

[13:18] Corona Anatine: even if the immediate effects are negative for the 'enemy'

[13:19] Corona Anatine: especially if such an 'enemy' is considerd as socially or ideologically negative

[13:19] herman Bergson: I think the most important thing is that we ar conscious of the fact that science is a thing we create.....not some monolithic thing which exists independent of our actions

[13:19] ZANICIA Chau: There was another report from Nasa today refuting rumours that the world will shut down next week for 6 days. They had to make a statement to quell all the Q's from ppl. That tells me ppl are still taking scientific things as gospel

[13:19] Corona Anatine: indeed withouth humans there would be no scinece

[13:20] Gemma Cleanslate GIGGLES!!

[13:20] Gemma Cleanslate: ...LOL...

[13:20] Fitch Woodrunner: In my expierience, Science has been about Discovery. What they discover can be used by others, but science should make no judgments about what is discovered... my apologies if this breaks into the current chat stream :P

[13:21] Gemma Cleanslate: that makes a lot of sense

[13:21] herman Bergson: Well you point at the meanig of scoience Fitch....

[13:21] Corona Anatine: np I was just pointing forward an idea /arguemtn for discussion further

[13:21] Vigos Lyric: Though as Mr. Bergson mention, scientists must choose their work. Which is sometimes led by wherever they can get funding

[13:21] ZANICIA Chau: I quite agree Jakey

[13:21] herman Bergson: And indeed some people take science as gospel...which is a problem in my opinion...

[13:22] herman Bergson: Indeed Vogos...

[13:22] herman Bergson: Vigos...

[13:22] herman Bergson: Good example is the pharmaceutical industry.....

[13:23] Fitch Woodrunner: Vigos, some scientists have an agenda, or others work for a company with an agenda. Yet

[13:23] Corona Anatine: well the rigorous peer review is a sort of gospel standard but a good one as it ensures credibility of research

[13:23] Fitch Woodrunner: oops

[13:23] Gemma Cleanslate: if there is peer review

[13:23] herman Bergson: Doesn’t work all the time Corona....

[13:23] ZANICIA Chau: I am completely No. ! sucker if they mention new peptides or something in a new face cream!!!!

[13:23] Fitch Woodrunner: hehe indeed

[13:23] Vigos Lyric: Yes indeed. It seems to be clear that commercial profit is a heavy driving force in scientific pursuit. And I would also say the military invests heavily with focused interest as well

[13:23] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ LOL ♥

[13:24] Gemma Cleanslate: or add a bit of zyx miracle oil

[13:24] ZANICIA Chau: exactly

[13:24] herman Bergson: It even happened on apolitical level here in my country....

[13:24] Corona Anatine: ok then platinum standard which should be aspired to

[13:24] Gemma Cleanslate: the science behind cosmetics and diet pills have no basis in real science

[13:24] herman Bergson: There the Secretary of Education stated that scientific research..funded with tax money should have social relevance....

[13:25] Corona Anatine: nor much of the beauty market

[13:25] Corona Anatine: but is that the science or the advertisers claims?

[13:25] herman Bergson: which for instance could mean....close the study of Sanskrit....

[13:25] ZANICIA Chau: good point Corona

[13:25] Corona Anatine: you dont feel that sanscrit might have social relevance ?

[13:26] ZANICIA Chau: heheh

[13:26] Gemma Cleanslate: ha

[13:26] herman Bergson: Cosmetics in advertizment is a bunch of pseudo scientific babble :-)

[13:26] Gemma Cleanslate: well it might in some way

[13:26] Gemma Cleanslate: like latin

[13:26] Corona Anatine: there is a lot of pseudo science babble about but such is not science by definition

[13:27] ZANICIA Chau: well ppl fell for the 'babble' of the world going into darkness for 6 days!

[13:27] Vigos Lyric: Ideally, I think science should be an internationally cumulative effort which has practical applications but also pursues knowledge in areas we are lacking, such as studying the brain. But it's clear scientific work takes investment

[13:27] Fitch Woodrunner: Going back to the lecture, where you offer the idea that a Scientist's theory can alter the data, and that there may be more than one interpretation... I see several examples of that in Evolution, Physics, Chemistry, I wonder how much of what we "know" today is based on a theory which may be based on someone's clouded judgement?

[13:27] herman Bergson: At least , I could assume, that we all see that there does not exist something like SCIENCE.....

[13:27] Corona Anatine: also in relation to 'social relevance -' a lot of the discoveries form the appolo programm were found to have social relevance - but not till after the discoveries were made

[13:28] herman Bergson: Ahh Fitch....Thomas Kuhn is pretty clear about that issue...

[13:28] Gemma Cleanslate: true corona

[13:28] Fitch Woodrunner: Cornoa, exactly, many Scientific discoveries had no practical applications until much later

[13:29] Fitch Woodrunner: like Silly Putty or the Slinky

[13:29] Corona Anatine: But it's clear scientific work takes investment

 -not true - expensive scientific work takes investement but even today some aspects can be done by amateurs

[13:29] ZANICIA Chau: hahaha

[13:29] herman Bergson: Always a difficult argument, Corona, pointing at spin offs from things like that

[13:29] Corona Anatine: for example the work done by amateur astronomers

[13:30] Corona Anatine: yeh the spin offs can never be predicted

[13:30] herman Bergson: To add some more to Fitch's remark...

[13:30] Vigos Lyric: To comment on a scientist having clouded judgment Fitch, that is why I think science should be taken seriously, involve critical analysis, peer review, and educated participants

[13:31] Gemma Cleanslate: very good idea

[13:31] Vigos Lyric: Sorry for stepping on your toe there, Herman

[13:31] herman Bergson: Kuhn shows that theories are kind of defended against anomalies....most of the time by ad hoc solutions...

[13:31] herman Bergson: Just because there are interests of groups involved...

[13:32] herman Bergson: No..you are right Vigos...I agree....but also science has shown to be all too human :-)

[13:32] Fitch Woodrunner: I just looked up Kuhn, thank you btw, and yes I agree... " Competing paradigms are frequently incommensurable; that is, they are competing accounts of reality which cannot be coherently reconciled."

[13:32] Corona Anatine: of course some with very different views concerning the causality of the universe

[13:33] herman Bergson: There is that famous story about that phony scientific article ...submitted to a magazine and "peer reviewed" and published...

[13:33] herman Bergson: I forgot the names involved....

[13:34] herman Bergson: Was a very embarressing case ...

[13:34] Vigos Lyric: To comment on what Corona said about science not necessarily needing funding, I agree that scientific work does not always need expensive funding. An amateur can make discoveries too and that data, if significant, should not be discounted. But some work really does need expensive instruments or experts to further research, such as biochemical analysis into proteins

[13:34] Corona Anatine: indeed so - it does depend on what is being studied

[13:34] Fitch Woodrunner: Herman, have you heard of the experiments where scientists actually affected the outcome with their thoughts?

[13:35] herman Bergson: No...

[13:35] Gemma Cleanslate: hopes not

[13:35] ZANICIA Chau: anyone remember War of the Worlds on the old radio? ppl were frightened to death it was all real back then! Have we really advanced?

[13:35] Gemma Cleanslate: but there are those who think they can

[13:35] Corona Anatine: in saome ways all experiments are affected by thoughts

[13:35] herman Bergson: Yes indeed Zan....they believed it!

[13:35] Fitch Woodrunner: the 3 dots leads me to believe you're calling the men in white coats? lol

[13:36] ZANICIA Chau: lol

[13:36] Vigos Lyric: I think ?I heard of one of those phony articles, Herman. Though I heard it was published by a vanity press, which will publish mostly anything. It certainly wouldn't need any actual scientific basis. Which is unfortunately as no scientific work should be published through a vanity press

[13:37] Fitch Woodrunner: my point was, the peer review wanted to believe in the results in those articles, so they created the evidence to support it, just from beliefe

[13:37] Gemma Cleanslate: hmmm

[13:37] ZANICIA Chau: created?

[13:37] herman Bergson: I don’t recall the details, Vigos, but we also had a prof here who manipulated data on the use of beta-blockers for heart patients during surgery......

[13:37] Corona Anatine: and there in lies one of the problems -in that too many of the general populs scientists are almost like preistly keepers of the mysteries and science aquires a level of mythic

[13:37] ZANICIA Chau: You mean fabricated?

[13:38] herman Bergson: He may even be responsible because of his publications for the death of people

[13:38] Corona Anatine: msytic which other try to acquire by emulation

[13:38] Fitch Woodrunner: not fabricated, I mean they wanted it to be real so badly, that it was

[13:38] Corona Anatine: [like with 'clever hans']

[13:38] Vigos Lyric: But that does bring up a good point. How the public reacts to what is deemed "scientific" (truely or not) is just as important as the scientific work itself. A work or factoid that is accepted, which is unscientific, could undermine science by muddying the public's scientific knowledge with pseudo-science

[13:39] ZANICIA Chau: Exactly so!

[13:39] Corona Anatine: or by attempting to scientifically verify religious claims

[13:40] ZANICIA Chau: that will be brought up next week!

[13:40] herman Bergson: :-) my next project..:-)

[13:40] Corona Anatine: a whole minefield in itself

[13:40] Fitch Woodrunner: Someone hacks into the news media, all the papers, magazines, major news channels, for one day fills it with The President Has Been Shot. America would go crazy... then the next day Prez Obama would be like "Chill out, I'm ok, wtf is wrong with all of you?"

[13:40] Gemma Cleanslate: oh boy

[13:40] herman Bergson: Or the omnipotent fMRI scanners of brains....

[13:41] herman Bergson: Well...a lot of iteresting thoughts fly around here again....

[13:41] Fitch Woodrunner: people, and I'm one of them, freak out so easily,

[13:42] herman Bergson: Maybe a good idea to cool down our brains again ^_^

[13:42] herman Bergson: Thank you all for you participation....

[13:42] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥

[13:42] ZANICIA Chau: I think we reached em passe

[13:42] Fitch Woodrunner: science is important, we should be spending more on science and medicine than we do on the military and football player salaries :P

[13:42] herman Bergson: Class dismissed...^_^

[13:42] Ciska Riverstone: thank you ㋡

[13:42] Gemma Cleanslate: don’t miss the christmas expo that opens dec 4

[13:42] ZANICIA Chau: thank you Herman, illuminating as ever

[13:43] Corona Anatine: i second jakey

[13:43] Vigos Lyric: An interesting thing about this whole topic is that scientific knowledge, once public, is free to be re-interpreted. I think the public has a powerful influence on how scientific works and tools are viewed. If the masses decide the LHC is a danger to humanity, it is threatened, which could block our work into particle physics

[13:43] Gemma Cleanslate: for the benefit of the relay

[13:43] herman Bergson: And yes Gemma...next Thursday we'll enter a minefield ^_^

[13:43] Gemma Cleanslate GIGGLES!!

[13:43] Gemma Cleanslate: ...LOL...

[13:43] Gemma Cleanslate: okk

[13:43] Vigos Lyric: Awww

[13:43] Fitch Woodrunner: ah well, my apologies again, this appears to be another portuguese incident :P

[13:43] Ciska Riverstone: good day or night folks .)

[13:43] Corona Anatine: or relocate it to nations which are less bothered

[13:43] herman Bergson: Yes Vigos, I agree...

[13:43] Corona Anatine: thus letting go of bein gin the forefront of reseacrh

[13:43] ZANICIA Chau: Night night everyone

[13:44] Gemma Cleanslate: Bye, Bye  ㋡ 

[13:44] Gemma Cleanslate: for now

[13:44] herman Bergson: Bye Zan :-)

[13:44] Vigos Lyric: Class is over so soon? I felt like it was just getting good :(

[13:44] bergfrau Apfelbaum: byebye all and ty herman&class:-)

[13:44] bergfrau Apfelbaum: ***** APPPPPPPLLLLAAAUUUSSSSEEEEEEE***********

[13:44] herman Bergson: Yes I know, Vigos....

[13:44] Corona Anatine: it was getting good - but if no one adds to it....

[13:44] Fitch Woodrunner: oh the big particle smashing donut, yes we need that, there are no reasons for it, but we need it

[13:45] Vigos Lyric: Yes that big donut around France and Switzerland

[13:45] herman Bergson: Ahhh CERN.....yes....

[13:46] herman Bergson: I guess it is mainly about prestige...

[13:46] Corona Anatine: lol yeh and the fears that were expressed that it might destroy the earth

[13:46] Fitch Woodrunner: I want a Mr. Fusion on my car, dammit, so we need to get going

[13:46] Vigos Lyric: Well I do think particle physics is important to understand. We don't know enough about the quantum realm

[13:46] Corona Anatine: well we are half way to using water as fuel - few years off before its universal tho

[13:47] herman Bergson: True Vigos....

[13:47] Fitch Woodrunner: and using really big magnets to smash stuff is fun

[13:47] Corona Anatine: lol yeh

[13:47] Fitch Woodrunner: film it, turn it into a spectator sport

[13:47] herman Bergson: but you might wonder....if people begin to asks for social relevance.....

[13:47] herman Bergson: what does it bring us?

[13:47] Corona Anatine: i5t has been done - some really big projects have utilised small PC users to help

[13:47] Vigos Lyric: I honestly think that will be a political and corporate battle, Corona... I'm a pessimist there but I think established money has a lot of sway. Perhaps if we could socially move towards cleaner energy...

[13:47] herman Bergson: Where is the profit in knowing there are higgs particles....

[13:48] Vigos Lyric: more efficient energy..

[13:48] Fitch Woodrunner: there was a water engine built in 1900, but the inventor died in a mysterious car crash and his lab burnt to the ground

[13:48] Corona Anatine: it bringas us knowledge herman which can be a reward in itself

[13:49] Vigos Lyric: There is social relevance in cheaper energy I think

[13:49] Vigos Lyric: cheaper utilities!

[13:49] Vigos Lyric: maybe

[13:49] herman Bergson: I agree...from a philosophical point of view I support this search for knwledge....

[13:49] herman Bergson: But I think it is not a neo-liberalist interest...

[13:50] Corona Anatine: not so sure Vigos- if the population keeps match with the energy usage then the price will remain the same

[13:50] Vigos Lyric: But.. clean, efficient energy is about long-term thinking. It seems the public at large thinks in the short term much of the time and demands goods and services now, not considering consequences enough

[13:50] Corona Anatine: no surprises there Vigos

[13:50] herman Bergson: The money makers are also short term thinkers Vigos...

[13:51] Corona Anatine: plus a lot of thought in society is geared to a 4 year timescale

[13:51] Corona Anatine: in the democracies anyway

[13:51] Vigos Lyric: That starts getting into general philosophy because I think it's everyone's duty to consider long-term effects of what they buy, support, believe

[13:51] Vigos LyricVigos Lyric begins showing his bias

[13:52] herman Bergson: I agree, Vigos, but the banks, stockholders, hedgefunds and others who control this planet do not think like that, I fear

[13:52] Corona Anatine: while in those nations ruled by 'god' or dictators - social usages of science is not priority

[13:52] Vigos Lyric: Perhaps more social and political pressure is neded. I just read NYC is experiencing a lot of protests

[13:53] Vigos Lyric: unrelated to energy but it's pressure at work

[13:54] Fitch Woodrunner: To make it right, we'd need to tear down the whole system, and begin using a better system a minute later. The world as a whole would need to be involved. We are so very far from that ever happening, so instead we clean up the messes as best we can and try to make the lives of a few people a lil better

[13:55] herman Bergson: Not as long as the other name for god is profit and greed Fitch

[13:55] Corona Anatine: ther eis a way that could be done - but it would involve a massive amount of death

[13:55] Beertje Beaumont: sorry I have to go, it's late

[13:55] Beertje Beaumont: have a goodnight

[13:55] herman Bergson: Bye Beertje :-)

[13:55] Beertje Beaumont: bye Herman

[13:55] Corona Anatine: because after WW" both Germany and Japan had societies rebuilt from stracth which are fairly succesful

[13:55] Vigos Lyric: I agree that it'll take a lot of shifting things around.. For example, to adjust to a totally different energy system, we'd need to rebuild the grid (which in the US I've read is starting to get seriously dated), create new energy plants, and somehow deal with the gas giants

[13:56] Corona Anatine: i asume you mean the corporations not jupiter and saturn

[13:56] Vigos Lyric: lol

[13:56] Vigos Lyric: yes

[13:57] Vigos Lyric: corporate gas giants

[13:57] Vigos LyricVigos Lyric imagines Jupiter with a corporate logo

[13:57] Fitch Woodrunner: Killing off all the stupid people isn't an option, because that intelligence is a sliding scale and everyone has their idea of what stupid is, I would be on someone's list :P

[13:57] Vigos Lyric: That would be pseudo-science put to dangerous work..

[13:57] Corona Anatine: ah IS is in silico nothign to do with role playing a jihadist psychotic

[13:57] herman Bergson: Yes, not a good idea Fitch.....

[13:57] Vigos Lyric: we don't fully understand what intelligence is and how it works

[13:58] Vigos Lyric: Haha, yes Corona. Insilico

[13:58] herman Bergson: I told you Vigos....!

[13:58] Corona Anatine: oh i wasnt suggesting we kill of the 'stupid' but i do feel that if we dont put controls on our own excesses then soem natural force wil do it for us eventually

[13:59] Vigos Lyric: WWII is a great example of pseudo-social science and genetics put to work to undermine ourselves..

[13:59] Vigos Lyric: lol, Herman. you were the first to mention that

[13:59] herman Bergson: and within the hour you got a second one Vigos :-))

[14:00] herman Bergson: But that is because you came to my class..the rest of SL wont notice :-))

[14:00] Vigos Lyric: Which is why I think people should consider long-term effects, environmentally, Corona

[14:00] Vigos Lyric: haha

[14:00] Corona Anatine: : )

[14:00] Fitch Woodrunner: teachers pet!

[14:00] Vigos Lyric: I need to read up more about the Islamic State...

[14:00] Vigos Lyric: lol

[14:01] herman Bergson: Be careful...don't loose your head....:-)

[14:01] Fitch Woodrunner: ha

[14:01] Corona Anatine: i wouldnt bother - just read the koran

[14:01] Vigos Lyric: For science and philosophy!

[14:01] Corona Anatine: as that is what they say they want to impose

[14:01] Fitch Woodrunner: hmm... not all followers of Islam are extremists :)

[14:01] Corona Anatine: nice one Herman