Monday, September 27, 2010

272: Science and the Supernatural

Some people are more able to control their supersense, their ability to hold supernatural beliefs, then others, but we have to accept that such beliefs are a natural phenomenon as a consequence of the design of the mind.

Supersense helps us to understand the world, so that we are able to make decisions and choices that feel good. It helps us to feel united with others, that hold the same beliefs.

The human being is a social animal and our need of social contacts is so strong that it is doubtful that we ever can ban supernatural beliefs with rational arguments.

Supernatural beliefs have always been with us, from the moment that we have archeological proof of the homo sapiens and the fact that he is conscious of his existence.

Deep in caves we find drawings on the walls which are more than thirteen thousand years old. These drawings are certainly not intended to be pieces of art or meant for public exhibition.

There is a famous little statue: the Lion Man. [behind me] It was found in the Hohlenstein-Stadel cave of Germany's Swabian Alb and dated at 32,000 years old, is associated with the Aurignacian culture and is the oldest known anthropomorphic animal figurine in the world.

Whether it is a human with a lion head or a lion with a human body we don't know, but what we do know is, that our ancestors already had imagination, were able to imagine things that not really exist. It means that they already possesed supersense.

Such a statue and cave drawings suggest clearly that prehistoric man used rituals and ceremonies. The prehistoric human must have known questions like: What happens when we are dreaming? What is there after death?

In the past 400 years there has changed more in our world than in the ten thousands of years before. Our knowledge of the universe has increased tremendously as has our knowledge of the smallest particles of matter.

Science has become more and more the fundament of our knowledge of the world. Thence you would expect that it gradually would have replaced supernatural beliefs about our world.

But it has not. And we have to face the question why people ignore what science has to tell us about supernatural beliefs. People just don't listen to scientists who say that supernatural beliefs make no sense at all.

There is something interesting in supernatural beliefs. We can distinguish two types: religious supernatural beliefs (God, angels, demons, devils, reincarnation,heaven, he, etc.) and profane supernatural beliefs( telepathy, clairvoyance, astrology, ghosts, trolls etc.)

All religions are based on supernatural beliefs, but not all supernatural beliefs are based on religion. This is very important to notice, because we now have in fact three belief-systems: profane supernatural beliefs, religion and science.

There is something very remarkable here. Religious supernatural beliefs are for some reason untouchable. When you intend to start scientific research on the existence of god or angels, they'll say you are nuts.

However, when you say that you gonna start thorough scientific research on astrology or clairvoyance, people say …wow….interesting….. I guess you will end up proving that is does not exist at a all or doesn't bring valid knowledge.

One possible explanation for this difference is that religion is not just a supernatural belief-system, but also a political means to unite people and control them.

In spite of the tremendous amount of scientific knowledge, science does not seem to get any grip on supernatural beliefs. Even worse, some people even find science a pretty suspect business.

As soon as scientists started to tinker with Nature (cloning a sheep, modifying plants like corn and soya, creating nuclear bombs etc.) 50% of the consumers in the US believed that modified products were dangerous. And science it to blame for it.

Science, religion and the profane supernatural are often each by themselves subject of a discussion, but how can these three belief-systems exist in ONE person next to each other and even overlap? And we say,that we are rational beings……..?!

For now we may conclude, that these three belief-systems aren't clearly separated. There are overlaps and we pick beliefs from any belief- system as it pleases us and suits our needs.

The Discussion

[13:23] herman Bergson: Thank you ..:)
[13:23] Gemma Cleanslate: very true
[13:23] herman Bergson: You have the floor ...
[13:23] Bejiita Imako: ah
[13:24] Alarice Beaumont: ok
[13:25] Alarice Beaumont: yes.. this really is true.. fascinating if presented
[13:25] itsme Frederix: Herman, I've a question about your "People just don't listen to scientists who say that supernatural beliefs make no sense at all.". Supersense seemed to act as a glue for society - you stated that too. So in my opinion for that and other reasons it makes sense, a lot of sense.
[13:25] Alaya Kumaki: what is funny is that since supernatural beliefs coexist with sciece beliefs, i wonder why scientists dont find out about their own supernatural beliefs which influence their search
[13:26] itsme Frederix: besides it just seems wired in our brain and our consiousness
[13:26] Alarice Beaumont: but there are scientific studies to find proof if supernatural happens
[13:26] itsme Frederix: supernatural does not happen, it is supersense interpretation
[13:26] herman Bergson: to clear up one point.....
[13:27] herman Bergson: It is a fact that our supernatural beliefs have a function...
[13:27] herman Bergson: as Itsme stated...
[13:27] herman Bergson: It works...
[13:27] herman Bergson: as a social glue for instance...
[13:27] itsme Frederix: ok
[13:28] herman Bergson: and what also becomes clear is that in this approach the scientific model of reality should prevail.....
[13:28] herman Bergson: a supernatural belief???
[13:28] AristotleVon Doobie: I wonder if the is supersense is manifested to counter a lack of confidence in ones ability or worthiness
[13:28] herman Bergson: I wouldnt say so...
[13:29] AristotleVon Doobie: or if those espousing it need others to feel unworthy
[13:29] herman Bergson: becaue it is the only model in which statements that lead to authority over others can be tested end refuted.
[13:29] Gemma Cleanslate: hmm
[13:29] Alarice Beaumont: hmmm.. i would rather join in on the power part you mentioned in one of the earlier classes
[13:30] herman Bergson: You mean that the supernatural beliefs are used as a political power Alarice?
[13:30] Alarice Beaumont: not only political.... but also in normal life
[13:30] Alaya Kumaki: yes, in religions, they are,
[13:30] Alarice Beaumont: yes.. i think it is .. to make people afraid
[13:31] herman Bergson: Oh yes...
[13:31] Bejiita Imako: indeed
[13:31] Bejiita Imako: can imagine that
[13:31] AristotleVon Doobie: try as I might, I can only see this supersense as a contrived tool to subordinate and not an innate ability
[13:31] herman Bergson: But the remarkable thing here is that religious supernatural thinking works..
[13:31] Alarice Beaumont: because not everyone is a scientist and can look for proof
[13:31] herman Bergson: while esoteric supernatural thinking has no effect
[13:31] Alarice Beaumont: hmm... yes right
[13:32] Alarice Beaumont: hmmm sure about that?
[13:32] Alaya Kumaki: they are used to make people finance some politic task without them knowing the real underlying cause, by telling them tales,, that they would beliefs, as for to go in war
[13:32] Bejiita Imako: yep, like me watching the LHC in action everyday for ex
[13:32] Alarice Beaumont: i have a colleague who believe in shamans
[13:32] Bejiita Imako: got to think about the movie angels and demons
[13:32] Bejiita Imako: thats a really good theme of science vs religion
[13:33] herman Bergson: Yes Alarice...esoteric thinking works on an individual level
[13:33] Bejiita Imako: ah
[13:33] herman Bergson: but religious thinking works on a collective level...
[13:33] herman Bergson: Oh that battle is raging now Bejiita
[13:33] Alaya Kumaki: collective beliefs is a fascinating phenomenon
[13:34] Alarice Beaumont: hmmm.... yes.. sounds right for me... doesn'T move the masses as much.. .. yes
[13:34] herman Bergson: Dawkins...The God Delusion...for instance
[13:34] herman Bergson: Yes Alaya...
[13:34] herman Bergson: especially related to supernatural beliefs
[13:35] AristotleVon Doobie: and the primary push in religion is to establish the unworthiness of the congregation
[13:35] herman Bergson: In the ned we may conclude that we cant get rid of supernatural beliefs :-)
[13:35] herman Bergson: end
[13:35] AristotleVon Doobie: we should try
[13:36] AristotleVon Doobie: :)
[13:36] Alarice Beaumont: perhaps not totally ...
[13:36] Abraxas Nagy: impossible
[13:36] herman Bergson: In fact you are right Aristotle..
[13:36] herman Bergson: But our brain is wired to produce supernatural beliefs
[13:37] itsme Frederix: Last week someone mentioned solipsism in this lecture. The more I read about the brain a.s.o. the more I think everything is reality but me-experience seems very virtual.
[13:37] herman Bergson: and loosing them might be a disaster even...
[13:37] AristotleVon Doobie: I have dumped mine, an swore an oath not to pass the ones I was given on
[13:38] itsme Frederix: swore is supernatural
[13:38] itsme Frederix: what does "swore" add
[13:38] Alarice Beaumont: ^^
[13:38] AristotleVon Doobie: LOL, to my god itsme
[13:38] herman Bergson: Yes and loosing the supernatural means loosing our fantasy...
[13:38] herman Bergson: our ability to imagine thing that do not really exist...
[13:38] Alarice Beaumont: yes.. you are right there Herman..
[13:38] itsme Frederix: So Ari you failed, but succeeded to be human
[13:38] AristotleVon Doobie: if ones seeks the joy in life, fantasy is unnecessary
[13:39] AristotleVon Doobie: no itsme I am my god :)
[13:39] herman Bergson: a basic drive of scientific research is the imagination of the researcher...
[13:39] Gemma Cleanslate: btw we now have a new fish discussion in the usa hormone salmon that wil grow faster
[13:39] herman Bergson: He imagines thing which are not there according to other...
[13:39] herman Bergson: then he proofs his hypothesis
[13:40] Alarice Beaumont: yes... and honestly Gemma... i have my doubts if that is ok lool
[13:40] herman Bergson: there we go again Gemma...creepy science
[13:40] Gemma Cleanslate: lolol
[13:40] Bejiita Imako: hahaha
[13:40] Gemma Cleanslate: i know
[13:40] Alarice Beaumont: proofs what Herman was saying earlier
[13:40] Gemma Cleanslate: ohoh ab crashed
[13:40] AristotleVon Doobie: that is all I ask, in order to accept is to be shown the evidence
[13:41] Alarice Beaumont: but not everyone has the education to follow the evidence
[13:41] Gemma Cleanslate: or even wants to try
[13:41] Alarice Beaumont: given by scientists for example.. so they have to believe
[13:41] herman Bergson: That, Alarice , is the big problem....
[13:41] AristotleVon Doobie: that is where the supersense proponents come in, like government...they deliver up the truth for the ignorant, unquestioned
[13:42] herman Bergson: SO the Dawkins like people ask for more education....focused on science only
[13:42] itsme Frederix: Well not really, using supersense might give you the opportunity to "believe" in scientific fact without understanding these.
[13:42] herman Bergson: No fairy tales in the classroom anymore
[13:42] AristotleVon Doobie: I am not convinced Dawkins isnt one of those
[13:42] AristotleVon Doobie: he has developed his own little realm
[13:43] herman Bergson: one of who Aristotle?
[13:43] AristotleVon Doobie: the manipulators
[13:43] herman Bergson: Manipulating in what sense?
[13:43] AristotleVon Doobie: science has its power hungry folks like all disciplines
[13:44] herman Bergson: true....
[13:44] Bejiita Imako: yes
[13:44] AristotleVon Doobie: He has to be able to prove all the things he advocates too
[13:44] herman Bergson: just do some research on cheating in will be shocked
[13:44] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ LOL ♥
[13:44] AristotleVon Doobie: I am sure
[13:44] AristotleVon Doobie: as long as humans are involved LOL
[13:44] Bejiita Imako: ok
[13:44] Gemma Cleanslate: depends on who is paying for the study in some cases
[13:44] Bejiita Imako: haha
[13:45] Alaya Kumaki: i think that most scientist search are fine, its the outcome and what is it use for e that are lead by the beliefs of many.. afterward or even before , it is that what lead the search, very experiemental
[13:45] AristotleVon Doobie: true Gemma, subjective bias
[13:45] Gemma Cleanslate: yep
[13:46] Alarice Beaumont: yes
[13:46] itsme Frederix: Well one of the things is that being scientist is a job, a way to make a living, so tthese guys have the same properties as others.
[13:46] herman Bergson: my goodness.......
[13:46] AristotleVon Doobie: when the cave man picked up a stick to stir his stew, there was another there who proceed to use it to poke another cavemans eye out
[13:46] herman Bergson: Just do a goole search on "cheating in science"
[[13:47] Bejiita Imako: ¨hehe ok
[13:47] itsme Frederix: but .... cheating in politics is a pleaonasm
[13:47] herman Bergson: true Itsme...
[13:48] herman Bergson: the further we get with this project the weirder we look as human beings...^_^
[13:48] AristotleVon Doobie: because we are weird :)
[13:48] Bejiita Imako: haha
[13:48] Bejiita Imako: ㋡
[13:48] herman Bergson: At least the idea that we are rational beings becomes more and more questionable ^_^
[13:48] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ LOL ♥
[13:48] Bejiita Imako: ㋡
[13:48] Gemma Cleanslate: very true
[13:48] Alarice Beaumont: don't say that!
[13:49] herman Bergson: ok...
[13:49] itsme Frederix: well rationality is not the thing that evolution drives so ...
[13:49] herman Bergson: I would say....
[13:49] AristotleVon Doobie: LOL, or I think we are unable to keep the primal brain in as good a control as we ought to
[13:49] Alaya Kumaki: yes that rationality based on beliefs is weirder
[13:49] herman Bergson: But it is Alaya...:-)
[13:50] Alaya Kumaki: yes
[13:50] herman Bergson: I think it is time to wait and see what the next lecture will bring us ^_^
[13:50] AristotleVon Doobie: indeed
[13:50] Bejiita Imako: ㋡
[13:50] herman Bergson: Thank you all for your participation....
[13:50] Bejiita Imako: yeah
[13:50] herman Bergson: Great discussion
[13:50] itsme Frederix: causality & teleologics <= big super nonsense , but it seems to please us well
[13:50] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥
[13:50] AristotleVon Doobie: Thank you , Professor :)
[13:50] Bejiita Imako: aaa yes
[13:50] Gemma Cleanslate: see you tuesday I hope
[13:50] Bejiita Imako: as said getting more and more interesting every time ㋡
[13:50] herman Bergson: Class dismissed :-)
[13:51] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ LOL ♥
[13:51] Gemma Cleanslate: party time
[13:51] itsme Frederix: thx Herman
[13:51] Bejiita Imako: cu soon
[13:51] herman Bergson: Yes GEmma!
[13:51] Alarice Beaumont: lol
[13:51] Alarice Beaumont: thanks Herman :-)
[13:51] Alaya Kumaki: thank you herman, as interesting as usuall
[13:51] herman Bergson: my pleasure Alaya
[13:51] Alaya Kumaki: now the next week, is far...
[13:52] Alarice Beaumont: you can study in between Alaya ,-)
[13:52] herman Bergson: Gives me time to cook up something nice for you Alaya ^_^
[13:52] Alaya Kumaki: ill google cheating on science meanwhile
[13:52] AristotleVon Doobie: lol
[13:52] herman Bergson: dont be shocked Alaya...
[13:52] herman Bergson: it is really fun
[13:52] Alaya Kumaki: oh,lol well yes its fun
Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, September 25, 2010

271: The Design of the Mind 2

In my former lecture I stated, that It can no longer be denied that the brain is an active player in our existence and not just a passive organ that first has to be filled with sensory experiences before it is able to be of some use to us.

Steven Arthur Pinker (born September 18, 1954) is a Canadian-American experimental psychologist, cognitive scientist, linguist and author of popular science. He is a Harvard College Professor and Johnstone Family Professor in the Department of Psychology at Harvard University.

He asserts that the mind is what the brain does. Our mind is constantly active in its attempts to understand the world by trying to find out how things work. This is because the world is complex and confusing and we lack the information about the world.

To understand each of us is a detective who is trying to make the puzzle pieces fit together, to find the perpetrator and to solve the crime. On the most basic level we spontaneously search for patterns and imagine hidden forces and causes.

Even the way we look at the world with our eyes is organized by mechanisms of the brain, which search for patterns. Just look at the picture behind me. What do you see. Not just four black dots. I bet you also see a square.

But there is no square at all and most remarkable is that we register brain activity in the visual cortex, in a way as if we are seeing a square. The point is, that the brain cells in the visual cortex register what is out there.

Then they generate their own brain activity as if they have come to a conclusion what is really out there: there is a square. This process of completing and complementing shows how the brain handles insufficient or missing information. In other words, we don't see with our eyes; we see with our brain.

Hood refers to an interesting experiment. Just like we, 4 months old babies get bored when they constantly see the same picture. When you show the baby this pattern, that you see behind me, it will look at it for a while curiously, then looses interest.

When you then show him a real square he doesn't seem to be interested in the "new" picture. However, as soon as you show the baby a circle he immediately looks curiously again at the new shape.

Thence you might conclude that the baby has seen the non existing square in our pattern of dots. You could go one step further and conclude that the brains of babies are designed to complement missing information in order to understand the world.

As I said in the beginning, the mind is an active player in our attempts to understand the world. We look for patters, we also look for patterns in event sequences. The design of our brain seems to force us to even see order in events even when it isn't there.

We have great difficulty to understand chaos. It is probably not 100% correct, but I like the irony in the observation that we even have developed chaos theory. Even in chaos, a complete state of disorder, we want to patterns.

This inclination of the brain to discover order in the world around us, makes us see patterns and order, which do not really exist. If you only would believe in invisible forces just a tiny bit, you easily fall victim of supernatural thinking.

A lot of the forces that make the world tick, gravity, molecular activity and so on we can not see and when we observe the activity of the brain, we notice that it has evolved into a mechanism that is highly trained in deducing from observation things we cannot see.

In fact we now call these deductions scientific theories. What was formerly in the hands of witches and alchemists is now the realm of physics for instance. The brain never stops looking for pattern and order.

However, not every theory, which brings order in our observations of the world, is a scientific theory. In its zeal to find order the brain makes mistakes to, in particular, when it falls in the trap of the famous Post hoc, Propter hoc fallacy.

B happens after A, thence B is caused by A. We know that this is a fallacy to some extend, but usually we call it common causality. But due to the design of our mind we are inclined to postulate forces, which may not be there and to connect events, where there is no real connection at all.

This explains our disposition to believe in the supernatural. It has a meaning, even in evolutionary sense. It is most clearly seen in rituals. Rituals give us a feeling of control in situations where control is important. This illusion of control is most important to us. It makes us immune for threat, especially when it is unpredictable.

This design of our minds develops already in early childhood, where we believe that stones live and the world is controlled by trolls and fairies. When we grow older we replace these supernatural beliefs for rational thinking. But do we really ?

Maybe some of you remember a hype in the US some years ago." Buy your own pet stone, he will be your most loyal companion!" Yes….you were invited to buy a stone of the size of a tennis ball and treat is as a pet!

I saw an american TV commercial, which advertised special beds and little cushions for your stone. It even demonstrated how you could take your stone out for a walk. You just throw it away and walk to it and pick it up again. It never will run away.

And there really were adult people who bought such stones…!

The discussion

[13:22] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ LOL ♥
[13:23] Abraxas Nagy: ╔╗╔═╦╗
[13:23] Abraxas Nagy: ║╚╣║║╚╗
[13:23] Abraxas Nagy: ╚═╩═╩═╝
[13:23] herman Bergson: There really were adult people who bought such stones…!
[13:23] Bejiita Imako: haha
[13:23] Beertje Beaumont: my dog does that...
[13:23] Gemma Cleanslate: many many i think
[13:23] Daruma Boa: same way as the church works^^
[13:23] herman Bergson: So far for today ...
[13:23] Bejiita Imako: i saw recently a thing like that with a interesting tweak, you plugged it into the usb on your computer, however was nothing wired to it inside
[13:23] herman Bergson: the floor is yours ^_^
[13:24] Bejiita Imako: totally wierd
[13:24] herman Bergson: We have a Power Bracelet now....
[13:24] Gemma Cleanslate: that is a very interesting explanation of how we grow to include the supernatural
[13:24] herman Bergson: Some piece of plastic around the wrist ..keeps you in balance of something...
[13:25] herman Bergson: Costs about 30 dollars
[13:25] Daruma Boa: its not only the supernatural. religion works the same way
[13:25] Beertje Beaumont: i wish i invented it..
[13:25] herman Bergson: Worthless piece of plastic
[13:25] Gemma Cleanslate: well that is the same in some minds
[13:25] Bejiita Imako: heh indeed, have seen tons of things like that
[13:25] Abraxas Nagy: all bullshit
[13:25] Daruma Boa: what?
[13:26] Abraxas Nagy: unless.... you make it true
[13:26] AristotleVon Doobie: gullible folks or wishful thinkers? certainly profit driven distributors :)
[13:26] herman Bergson: When I talk about the supernatural I mean from the simple phenomenon that you talk to your car to religion and the pope
[13:26] Daruma Boa: yes everone has the "power" to do things..
[13:26] Daruma Boa: to be happy, or sad ...
[13:27] herman Bergson: Wishful thinking is a kind of supernatural thinking too..
[13:27] Daruma Boa: but most ppl need guidelines for life
[13:27] Daruma Boa: such like religion or being supernatural^^
[13:27] herman Bergson: the belief that you can influence the world by your mind
[13:27] Daruma Boa: no
[13:27] Abraxas Nagy: mind over matter
[13:27] Daruma Boa: its your brain
[13:27] Abraxas Nagy: its possible.. there is even some evidence for it
[13:28] AristotleVon Doobie: the power to accomplish is initiated by thought.....I think that is the seed of existence
[13:28] herman Bergson: Uri Geller?
[13:28] Daruma Boa: we are not able to use our brain^^
[13:28] Abraxas Nagy: noooo
[13:28] Abraxas Nagy: statistical analasys
[13:28] Daruma Boa: perhaps we need about 500 years more *GIGGLES* :)~~~~
[13:28] Gemma Cleanslate: much more than that
[13:28] Abraxas Nagy: wow chatlag
[13:28] Daruma Boa: humans only talk about things
[13:28] herman Bergson: There is no reason to question such a possibility Daruma...
[13:29] Daruma Boa: they don't do anything or try out
[13:29] herman Bergson: Evolution hasn't stopped I would say
[13:29] Daruma Boa: hope so^
[13:29] herman Bergson: the brain is the result of an evolutionary process and that process goes on...
[13:30] Gemma Cleanslate: i think it is very helpful that the psychologists are learning so much about the brain
[13:30] Daruma Boa: yes but we have to learn to use it
[13:30] herman Bergson: but it has no goal
[13:30] Abraxas Nagy: Stanford did research into remote sensing
[13:30] Gemma Cleanslate: to discuss their findings along with the philosophies
[13:30] Daruma Boa: not only reading the books.
[13:30] Daruma Boa: try to live what the books will tell us.
[13:30] herman Bergson: Yes Abraxas ..there is a lot of research on such subjects....
[13:30] Abraxas Nagy: exactly
[13:30] Gemma Cleanslate: oh yes
[13:30] herman Bergson: but it doesn't make them supernatual
[13:31] Daruma Boa: most humans are afraid i think
[13:31] Daruma Boa: afraid of the death e.g.
[13:31] AristotleVon Doobie: you write your own book, the other's are just footnotes in yours
[13:31] herman Bergson: When we don't know what is going on , we just don't proof of the existence of supernatural forces
[13:31] Daruma Boa: they want the question answered: why to we live
[13:32] Daruma Boa: there must be a result of each live
[13:32] Daruma Boa: would be terrible 4 most ppl to live and in the end there is no meaning^^
[13:32] herman Bergson: Where is that law of nature formulated Daruma...that life must have a result?
[13:33] herman Bergson: That can be regarded as supernatural thinking, I would say
[13:33] Daruma Boa: all are searching for the answer
[13:33] Abraxas Nagy: ah yes
[13:33] Daruma Boa: u know its 42^^
[[13:33] herman Bergson: The number of Life?
[13:33] herman Bergson: yes 42
[13:33] Abraxas Nagy: I think its important to define supernatural a bit more
[13:34] Abraxas Nagy: cuz there's many levels
[13:34] Gemma Cleanslate: very true ab
[13:34] herman Bergson: There are two situations....
[13:35] herman Bergson: situation one: we can explain the phenomena in the world by the laws of physics etc.
[13:35] herman Bergson: Situation two: Part of the phenomena we cannot explain by science...we just dont know...
[13:36] AristotleVon Doobie: supernatural falls in the category of unproveable things, I can make any assertion I wish and if you can not disprove it then it could be the truth
[13:36] herman Bergson: Situation three: We use an explanation for phenomena which defy all laws of nature..
[13:36] Gemma Cleanslate: :-)
[13:36] Daruma Boa: and that we want to explain and put it into a "schublade" sorry, dunno the english word^^
[13:36] Gemma Cleanslate: miracles
[13:36] herman Bergson: Situation three is the prototype of supernatural thinking
[13:36] Bejiita Imako: ah
[13:36] herman Bergson: drawer..
[13:36] Daruma Boa: thank u^^
[13:37] Abraxas Nagy: aahhh but does not knowing make something supernatural?
[13:37] herman Bergson: no.....that is a non sequitur...
[13:37] Abraxas Nagy: not necceceraly
[13:37] Abraxas Nagy: oops
[13:37] Alarice Beaumont: but isn't it although interesting that supernatural believes usually work with the not so educated people and in bad times?
[13:37] herman Bergson: I would say..not at all....
[13:37] AristotleVon Doobie: are supernatural things beyond the realm of the senses?
[13:37] Abraxas Nagy: a what?
[13:37] Gemma Cleanslate: ah yes
[13:37] Abraxas Nagy: non sequiter?
[13:38] herman Bergson: Yes Alarice....
[13:38] Daruma Boa: mh, no alarice. i know very well establised "witches";-)
[13:38] AristotleVon Doobie: and I know some very properous clergy
[13:38] herman Bergson: non sequitur means that it can not logically be deduced from the fact that we don't know something it necessarily leads to the justification of supernatural thinking
[13:39] herman Bergson: But keep in mind...!!!
[13:39] Abraxas Nagy: ah ty
[13:39] Alarice Beaumont: well.. the exception is not the rule^^
[13:39] herman Bergson: I am NOT denying the existence of supernatural thinking....
[13:39] herman Bergson: neither do I deny that is has a meaning in our life....a function...
[13:40] AristotleVon Doobie: first we must ascertain the motivation behind the supernatural utterances
[13:40] herman Bergson: but it has a psychological function....
[13:40] Daruma Boa: yes, but in religion and supernatural things, i can not think in drawers;-) cos i don't have the experiences to talk about the truth. what right or wrong is.
[13:40] herman Bergson: it is NOT a scientificc explanation of the world around us
[13:40] Abraxas Nagy: exactly
[13:40] Daruma Boa: i think i should live about 17 lifes, to start a discussion about that
[13:41] herman Bergson: What we are doing here is trying to find an answer to the question: WHY do we believe in the Unbelievable?
[13:41] AristotleVon Doobie: I do not LOL
[13:41] herman Bergson: And so far we have found one part of the answer...
[13:41] Abraxas Nagy: to have progress
[13:42] herman Bergson: Our brain is wired to do so by nature
[13:42] Daruma Boa: ok ari come back in 2 weeks;-))
[13:42] AristotleVon Doobie: LOL
[13:42] AristotleVon Doobie: I will believe even less I am afraid
[13:43] Daruma Boa: hi ziro
[13:43] Bejiita Imako: hi Ziro
[13:43] herman Bergson: Aristotle.....I am sure you act against the rationality of scientific explanation too now and then...
[13:43] Ziro Qunhua: Hi everyone
[13:43] Abraxas Nagy: .hi Ziro
[13:43] herman Bergson: Ever cursed your car or some other object?
[13:43] AristotleVon Doobie: rationality seems to be the missing ingrediant in supernaturl me
[13:43] Abraxas Nagy: uuhhmm everyday
[13:44] herman Bergson: Ever said...damn stupid car!
[13:44] Bejiita Imako: my gof clubs when i make a slice
[13:44] Bejiita Imako: haha
[13:44] Abraxas Nagy: everyday
[13:44] Abraxas Nagy: ╔╗╔═╦╗
[13:44] Abraxas Nagy: ║╚╣║║╚╗
[13:44] Abraxas Nagy: ╚═╩═╩═╝
[13:44] herman Bergson: Exactly...
[13:44] AristotleVon Doobie: never seriously LOL
[13:44] herman Bergson: It is deeply rooted in our mind, this way of interpreting the world
[13:44] Daruma Boa: mostly...
[13:45] AristotleVon Doobie: I knew a woman that wore a monkeys foot around her neck, she was fearful only because of her derangement
[13:45] Daruma Boa: oh sorry, i must go.
[13:45] Bejiita Imako: cu Daruma
[13:45] Gemma Cleanslate: me too soon
[13:45] herman Bergson: Bye Daruma ㋡
[13:45] Abraxas Nagy: *:-.,_,.-:*'``'* *** *:-.,_,.-:*'``'*
[13:45] Abraxas Nagy: *:-.,_,.-:*D A R U M A -:*'``'*
[13:45] Abraxas Nagy: *:-.,_,.-:*'``'* *** *:-.,_,.-:*'``'*
[13:45] Abraxas Nagy: bye
[13:45] AristotleVon Doobie: bye Daruma
[13:45] Daruma Boa: see u on thursday. if the cards will show me the way *GIGGLES* :)~~~~
[13:45] Beertje Beaumont: bye daruma
[13:46] AristotleVon Doobie: LMAO
[13:46] Bejiita Imako: ㋡
[13:46] Bejiita Imako: haha
[13:46] herman Bergson: Ok....I think we have a clear sight on our situation now....
[13:46] bergfrau Apfelbaum: bye Daruma!
[13:46] AristotleVon Doobie: yes indeed I will have to check my horoscope
[13:46] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ LOL ♥
[13:46] Gemma Cleanslate: clear
[13:46] Gemma Cleanslate: ok
[13:46] Bejiita Imako: my horoscope never is right about me
[13:47] herman Bergson: our brain is wired up to seek patterns .....and it leads to science and to supernatural explanations
[13:47] AristotleVon Doobie: it is all fanciful thinking, a way to make a buck
[13:47] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥
[13:47] Gemma Cleanslate: herman
[13:47] Gemma Cleanslate: see you thrusday
[13:47] bergfrau Apfelbaum: gemmaa :-) byebye
[13:47] Bejiita Imako: ㋡
[13:47] Gemma Cleanslate: Bye, Bye ㋡
[13:47] Bejiita Imako: bye Gemma
[13:47] herman Bergson: Thank you all for your participation...
[13:47] Abraxas Nagy: bye .gemma
[13:47] herman Bergson: Class dismissed
[13:47] Bejiita Imako: keeps getting more and more interesting this ㋡
[13:47] Abraxas Nagy: thank YOU professor
[13:47] AristotleVon Doobie: I think we wire our brains to find them
[13:47] Bejiita Imako: t Y
[13:47] Alarice Beaumont: lol
[13:47] Bejiita Imako: ㋡
[13:47] bergfrau Apfelbaum: ty herman:-)

Enhanced by Zemanta

Monday, September 20, 2010

270: The Design of the Mind

Our world is full of supernatural beliefs. Do you hold supernatural beliefs and can you answer the question WHY you do so? Just this morning in my newspaper… a short report about the Norwegian royal princess Märtha Louise. She is 38.

In an interview she had revealed that she could talk with the dead and talk with angels, which caused a storm of criticism. And the criticism is from my perspective really funny.

The protestant bishop, Laila Riksaanen Dahl told on the Norwegian TV that the dead are the exclusive business of God and that they should be left in peace.
QUOTE: " To change this, can unleash dark forces, which we do not know."

I live with superstition in my own life too. Look at this picture. This object I have in my left pocket… yes definitely the left pocket. Nothing else may be in that pocket, no coins, no keys..only this object.

It has three parts. That coin with a hole in it is a so called age coin, used for instance in discos to prevent too young people to get access to cigarette machines. I found it on the stairs of the entrance of the institute I worked. I found it on the last working day before my retirement. I recognized its symbolic meaning and kept it.

The little animal may be hard to recognize, but it is a small elephant. When my wife was born her parents really picked her first name from the newspaper. It was the name of a little elephant born in a Dutch zoo on the same day.

The other part is St. Christopher.Christopher has always been a widely popular saint, being especially revered by athletes, mariners, ferrymen, and travelers. So, I guess that he helps to keep me on the right track.

Quite a lot of nonsense beliefs, isn't it. (^_^) Ok, I plead guilty, but before you throw the first stone (seems to be popular again these days;-) look at your own life, where you may feel uncomfortable on Fryday the 13th, with a black cat or deeply guilty when you have committed a real sin in eyes of your God in your opinion.

As we saw in our former lecture, this can not be simply attributed to our education or our culture. Especially because among other things, this does hardly explain why we are so WILLING to cherish our supernatural beliefs.

This willingness is just in our mind, or to use Hood's words, we find the explanation in the design of our mind. "Design" means the organized way how our brain is equipped to understand and interpret the world.

Just like our other body parts have evolved during millions of years, in the same way has our brain gone through an evolution to help us survive.

Most scientists nowadays agree with the conclusion, that our brain is equipped with a set of specialized, internal mechanisms, which make it possible for us to process our experiences. In other words: we posses a mental toolbox.

This makes me think of the epistemological debate about the origin of knowledge and how we discuss ontology. Can we conclude that Immanuel Kant (1724 - 1804) is the winner of the debate?

Kant believed himself to be creating a compromise between the empiricists and the rationalists. The empiricists believed that knowledge is acquired through experience alone, but the rationalists maintained that such knowledge is open to Cartesian doubt and that reason alone provides us with knowledge.

Kant argues, however, that using reason without applying it to experience will only lead to illusions and empty concepts, while experience will be purely subjective without first being subsumed under pure reason.

Then John Locke (1632 - 1704) is the looser. He postulated that the mind was a blank slate or tabula rasa. Contrary to pre-existing Cartesian philosophy, he maintained that we are born without innate ideas, and that knowledge is instead determined only by experience derived from sense perception.

It can no longer be denied that the brain is an active player in our existence and not just a passive organ that first has to be filled with sensory experiences before it is able to be of some use to us.

Now we are so smart and impressed by the complexity of the brain, that we have great difficulty to believe that it has been different so many million years ago. The brain did not simply dropped from the sky, ready and fully operational.

It is the result of a long evolution and the designer of this brain is natural selection. And here the battle begins, when we enter the field of evolutionary psychology.

The application of evolutionary theory to the psychology and behavior of other animal species is generally uncontroversial. However, adaptationist approaches to human psychology are contentious, with critics questioning the scientific nature of evolutionary psychology, and with more minor debates within the field itself.

Evolutionary Psychology is grounded on the theory that fundamentally our psychology is based on biology, the composition of our brains. This is a form of reductionism, a research philosophy according to which the nature of complex things can be understood in terms of simpler or more fundamental things (i.e. reduced).

Now just read the following sentence: "The debates regarding the validity of evolutionary psychology have been regarded as occasionally quite vicious, with a strong ad hominem component."

I found this statement in an article in Wikipedia and it did not surprise me at all. When Darwin published his evolutionary theory, the world was literally in shock. Was there a connection between an ape and the human being??? Impossible!

The response was that cartoons showed Darwin as an ape. We are now entering a very sensitive area of the human discourse about ourselves. So let's keep our debates as objective and focused on the subject as possible, and let's avoid any ad hominem arguments.

The Discusion

[13:27] herman Bergson: Thank you...
[13:27] herman Bergson: The floor is yours ^_^
[13:28] itsme Frederix: applause
[13:28] APPLAUSE: A Hearty round of applause bursts from the crowd
[13:28] Jozen Ocello: claps
[13:28] herman Bergson: thank you...
[13:28] Bejiita Imako: YAY! (yay!)
[13:28] : Qwark Allen joins the applause.
[13:28] Bejiita Imako: interesting
[13:28] herman Bergson: You surprise me..!
[13:28] itsme Frederix: some Quarcks are around
[13:29] herman Bergson: So nothing new in my are all ok with it? :-)
[13:29] Beertje Beaumont: yes
[13:29] herman Bergson: Great ^^
[13:29] Quizzle Mode beams
[13:29] Abraxas Nagy: yep
[13:30] AristotleVon Doobie: a mighty strength is required for most foslk to resist ad hominem argumentation
[13:30] itsme Frederix: Well if you persist?
[13:30] Qwark Allen: i believe that was a similar concept as natural selection that made the brain as it is
[13:30] Qwark Allen: the sexual selection
[13:30] itsme Frederix: I was triggered by this sentence "13:22] herman Bergson: It can no longer be denied that the brain is an active player in our existence and not just a passive organ that first has to be filled with sensory experiences before it is able do be of some use to us."
[13:30] Qwark Allen: was the choice of thousands of years, of the female, that got us in this direction
[13:30] Qwark Allen: not the natural selection
[13:31] herman Bergson: Evolutionary psychology is fascinating.....especially the controversies…
[13:31] AristotleVon Doobie: I would think with supernatural things it can only be ad hominem
[13:31] itsme Frederix: Which implies a separation between "us" and "brain" (and maybe body?)
[13:31] herman Bergson: Well Aristotle...
[13:31] itsme Frederix: we utilize the brain or ... vice versa?
[13:32] herman Bergson: the problem with beliefs is that people are in love with their own beliefs...
[13:32] AristotleVon Doobie: that is my suspicion itsme
[13:32] Gemma Cleanslate: oh my yes
[13:32] AristotleVon Doobie: the former
[13:32] Bejiita Imako: aaa yes
[13:32] AristotleVon Doobie: LOL yes indeed they are
[13:32] itsme Frederix: first Ari (and I think mine is a little besides the topic - et)
[13:32] herman Bergson: and when you critizise their beliefs you critisize their beloved ones......the ones they cuddle every day
[13:32] AristotleVon Doobie: Hood I believe is one of them
[13:33] herman Bergson: Hood is a horror to believers
[13:33] Quizzle Mode: We come very close here to asking the unanswerable question of how can we know anything outside our own thoughts? Does anything at all exist outside one's thoughts/perceptions.
[13:33] Gemma Cleanslate: bergie
[13:33] herman Bergson: That is an old one Quizzle...sollipsism...
[13:33] Qwark Allen: you got to read about darwin's nightmare with the peacock
[13:34] Quizzle Mode: yes, and one we really just have to live with ;)
[13:34] herman Bergson: But we leave the epistemological debate out here for the moment...and decline sollipsism as a tenable stand
[13:35] herman Bergson: just a pragmatic point of view..^_^
[13:35] herman Bergson: Wel I guess we can move on then....
[13:35] Quizzle Mode: Sollipsism is the stand, not the question Prof, and I totally agree that we must leave the question aside for practical purposes.
[13:36] herman Bergson: thank you Quizzle...
[13:36] itsme Frederix: So to summarize: supersense is natural and gives way for supernatural thoughts/behaviour - and its all because it made (and makes)sense to survive.
[13:36] herman Bergson: You could say that Itsme....
[13:37] itsme Frederix: Well that is my interpretation of your speech and Hood's book
[13:37] herman Bergson: If I look at my own personal superstition…it is just fun....and in a way emotionally not just fun....
[13:37] AristotleVon Doobie: I just can not see any rationality much less empirical data to substantiate superstition except a feeling
[13:37] herman Bergson: yes Aristorle...
[13:37] Repose Lionheart: the human brain has a keen and evolved ability to see patterns and connections...a common element in "supernatural" perceptions
[13:38] itsme Frederix: Herman, more then fun because these things co-relate with some good things in life, and you made the correlation
[13:38] Beertje Beaumont: is supersense just for humans?
[13:38] herman Bergson: But dont fall into the pittfal of binary tinking...
[13:38] herman Bergson: that we are either rational or emotional...
[13:38] herman Bergson: we are one....
[13:39] AristotleVon Doobie: it seems,like religion, added to the list of unprovable notions
[13:39] herman Bergson: every thought has a rational and emotional dimension...
[13:39] AristotleVon Doobie: I have a 'feeling' we are not one
[13:39] herman Bergson: if you only reduce our behavior to a permanent struggle to survive...
[13:39] herman Bergson: we need it all..the rational and the irrational, it seems
[13:40] AristotleVon Doobie: well, yes....if we approach it as us being two selves
[13:40] itsme Frederix: Arie, the point is that supersense is NOT unprovable but that it is a theory based on observations and fitting in evolutionairy thoughts
[13:40] AristotleVon Doobie: it becomes much clearer
[13:40] herman Bergson: and there is no clear border between rational and irrational...
[13:40] herman Bergson: that is just an idea generated by our brain
[13:40] herman Bergson: a handy tool to understand the world around us
[13:41] Bejiita Imako: aa o
[13:41] Bejiita Imako: ok
[13:41] herman Bergson: ok..
[13:41] itsme Frederix: Herman, better to say a handy tool to .. handle and deal with the world
[13:42] itsme Frederix: .. and ourselves in that world
[13:42] herman Bergson: Next Tuesday we'll look into the specifics of the it works and what consequences this has
[13:42] Bejiita Imako: ok
[13:42] herman Bergson: Ok Itsem..agreed!
[13:42] Bejiita Imako: ㋡
[13:42] herman Bergson: Thank you all for your particiaption....
[13:43] AristotleVon Doobie: :) thank you Professor
[13:43] Repose Lionheart: Thank you, Professor ㋡
[13:43] herman Bergson: Class dismissed
[13:43] Bejiita Imako: was nice again Herman
[13:43] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥
[13:43] Sartre Placebo: thx herman
[13:43] Abraxas Nagy: thank you professor
[13:43] Jozen Ocello: thanks
[13:43] Bejiita Imako: interesting topic as usual ㋡
[13:43] Beertje Beaumont: thank you Professor
[13:43] Abraxas Nagy: as always
[13:43] itsme Frederix: thx, and we will look into the specifics of the brain as we think it as and how we think it works. I guess the brain keeps that secret for us.!
[13:43] Quizzle Mode: Thank you Professor
[13:43] Gemma Cleanslate: hope I can make it on time tuesday i will be out of town
[13:43] Gemma Cleanslate: with the computer
[13:43] Rodney Handrick: thanks Herman
[13:43] Gemma Cleanslate: so if internet works i will be here
[13:43] herman Bergson: Great you made is so early Rodney!
[13:44] Gemma Cleanslate: yes nice!
[13:44] bergfrau Apfelbaum: ty herman:-)
[13:44] Rodney Handrick: yes, why yes I did!
[13:44] Bejiita Imako: ok cu soon
[13:44] herman Bergson: Thank you all!
[13:44] Bejiita Imako: ㋡
[13:44] Gemma Cleanslate: Bye, Bye ㋡

Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

269: Why do we believe in the supernatural?

Yesterday I was watching this picture viewer with a friend. It contains pictures I make of my Sl experiences with friends. At a certain moment the picture of Bergie showed up and the very second, that her picture appeared I received an IM…. yes from Bergie.

Isn't that odd ??!!! Do you recognize the experience? You are thinking of somebody and at that same moment the phone rings… the other end the person you were just thinking about.

We have great difficulty to believe that this is just coincidence… The psychologist Carl Jung even invented a word for this phenomenon (1920/1951): synchronicity.

Synchronicity is the experience of two or more events that are apparently causally unrelated occurring together in a meaningful manner. To count as synchronicity, the events should be unlikely to occur together by chance.

It was a principle that Jung felt gave conclusive evidence for his concepts of archetypes and the collective unconscious, in that it was descriptive of a governing dynamic that underlies the whole of human experience and history—social, emotional, psychological, and spiritual.

Here we are at the heart of our stand: when we read something like this… about synchronicity, we see the supersense at work. In other words, this is a supernatural concept, or to refrase that, it is scientific nonsense.

Why do people believe in things that defy the laws of nature? This cannot be pure ignorance. No….because many people say that they have proof for it. Just remember what I told you about my personal experience yesterday.

And yet there is nothing supernatural at work here. Such events we call coincidences, even tho we have trouble to accept that. Probably is our brain not properly equipped to deal with coincidences and is it inclined to see supernatural forces at work here.

This makes me think of the words by Bertrand Russell in his book "The problems of Philosophy" (1912):
"Philosophy, if it cannot answer so many questions as we could wish, has at least the power of asking questions which increase the interest of the world, and show the strangeness and wonder lying just below the surface even in the commonest things of daily life."

Like the brain seems to have difficulty with handling coincidences, philosophy has difficulty with coming up with answers..

Maybe this is one of the reasons that our daily life is loaded with all kind of supernatural considerations. Small ones like "this can not be a coincidence!", while there is no causal relation between events. And big ones: all kinds of religious and esoteric beliefs.

The American philosopher and psychologist William James (1842 -1919) already noticed that a lot of people not only believe in the reality of existence but also in what is behind it or transcends it.

Something untangle, that is not directly observed by our senses. This 'more' eludes natural explanations. It is supernatural. In fact it is the basis of all religious beliefs.

Why are we so wiling to think in that way? A first explanation is that we are educated to think that way. Isn't it funny that we are first told that Santa really exists and when we get older they call you nuts if you still believe that.

But we have a point here… We were not born believing in astrology. We have learnt to believe in it. But that doesn't answer the question why we are so WILLING to participate in rituals and ceremonies.

An answer to that could be: there is something in it for us: by believing supernatural things we can participate in society. Beliefs unite people.

But if culture is the sole source of supernatural beliefs,then we have to stop telling our children all that supernatural nonsense and educate them with scientific thinking.

Or like Richard Dawkins writes in "the God Delusion" (2006): "If you feel trapped in the religion of your upbringing, it would be worth asking yourself how this came about. The answer is usually some form of childhood indoctrination."

There is another explanation for our WILLINGNESS to believe in the supernatural. Even if the main source would be only culture we are still left with the question WHERE emerged the first supernatural beliefs???

And an other anthropological observation is that many (isolated) cultures cherish all kinds of supernatural ideas and beliefs.

"Colorless green ideas sleep furiously" is a sentence composed by Noam Chomsky in 1957 as an example of a sentence with correct grammar (logical form) but semantics that are nonsensical.

It shows that the grammatical structure is nor enough to communicate ideas. Ideas have to fit into an existing context to be understood. For a lot of people scientific ideas and explanations are hard to understand.

On the other hand supernatural explanations and ideas are way more easier to accept, it seems. Like the grammatical correctness of a sentence is not enough to give it a meaning, so is culture and education not enough to explain the meaning of the supernatural.

For that explanation we have to look at the design of our mind, which we will do next Thursday. Thank you.

The Discussion

[13:22] herman Bergson: If you have questions or remarks..plz geo ahead
[13:23] herman Bergson: Well I guess all was clear then ^_^
[13:23] Bejiita Imako: hmm interesting concept for sure this
[13:23] Beertje Beaumont: i'm not that fast in reading english..
[13:23] Repose Lionheart: everyone is looking at your pictures I would guess, Prof ㋡
[13:23] Repose Lionheart: hehe
[13:24] herman Bergson: could be right Repose..
[13:24] Bejiita Imako: what you said in the beginning have also happened to me many times
[13:24] Quizzle Mode: Are these beliefs a way that people seek meaning in (or to) life? Is it that humans have a need to "make sense of the world"? and we fall to superstition when science doesn't or can't answer.
[13:24] Jozen Ocello: i like what you said about "Like the brain seems to have difficulty with handling coincidences, philosophy has difficulty with coming up with answers"
[13:24] herman Bergson: Oh YES Quizzle....
[13:25] herman Bergson: Absolutely...
[13:25] herman Bergson: We cant live with the unexplained...
[13:25] Bejiita Imako: aaa yes that can be a possibility too i guess
[13:25] herman Bergson: just look how we think about death,....
[13:25] Mickorod Renard: maybe we are victims of being a spiecies of crative minds
[13:25] Quizzle Mode: Recent studies in the US have shown students tend to be less religious as they learn more science and this is worrying some envangelical students, already some states teach intelligent design as science alongside biology and evolution.
[13:26] Repose Lionheart: the world absurd then...throwing up a creature from its heart that so needs meaning, yet there being none inherent in that world?
[13:26] herman Bergson: we have difficulty to live with the idea that death simple is over..
[13:26] herman Bergson: Yes Quizzle..I know...I'll get to creationism soon
[13:27] herman Bergson: Well Repose....
[13:27] Quizzle Mode: Repose, that comes back to the seach for what is meaning surely? if you cannot prove there is no meaning then surely you cannot argue from that position?
[13:27] herman Bergson: a fundamental question....
[13:27] Bruce Mowbray: Does philosophy attempt to "answer" science? -- for example, the quantum physics idea of "non-locality" -- which WOULD explain "synchronicity" through science.
[13:27] Bruce Mowbray:
[13:27] herman Bergson: No Bruce....
[13:27] Repose Lionheart: Was just asking a question, me ㋡
[13:27] herman Bergson: philosophy asks questions....
[13:28] herman Bergson: And as Russell says...
[13:28] herman Bergson: as soon as we have a real answer the question moves to the realm of science
[13:28] Quizzle Mode: In ancient times many philosophers where scientists, maybe philosophy is more a branch of science than humanities?
[13:29] itsme Frederix: which is like metaphycis as another word for philosophy
[13:29] herman Bergson: I wouldnt agree to that Bruce...
[13:29] herman Bergson: The philosophical question comes first....then comes science...the body of knowledge
[13:30] Repose Lionheart: Ritual and religious behaviour seems to date back over a million years (to seeming ritual cannibalism among homo erectus as determined by bone studies)…whatever religion and supernatural belief are, their roots are deep and they must fulfill a very deep need in us
[13:30] herman Bergson: But what Quizzle said is more important...
[13:30] Quizzle Mode: isn't metaphysics a branch of philosophy in the way that algeba is a branch of math?
[13:30] itsme Frederix: I disagree strong Herman, science is just not all - or maybe all based on logistics but Wittgenstein "posphoned" an other sight
[13:30] herman Bergson: Yes REpose.....
[13:31] herman Bergson: I know Itsme....
[13:31] herman Bergson: But it is not our subject at the moment...
[13:31] itsme Frederix: in his opinion, science and logistics is more like a tautology
[13:31] herman Bergson: What we try to understand is where supernatural beliefs come from
[13:31] itsme Frederix: which makes sense
[13:32] itsme Frederix: as son as you know its (more or less) obvious
[13:32] herman Bergson: and Quizzle pointed at our need to give meaning to life...
[13:32] Repose Lionheart: 300 year of reasoned scientific thought is a light turned on upon our world...but it may take a good while to deeply affect the evolved habits of mind of our species
[13:32] Quizzle Mode nods in agreesment with Repose
[13:32] itsme Frederix: Herman I agree its not our subject but it was so who stated this doubtfull vision
[13:32] herman Bergson: Yes Repose...and that is where people like Dawkins come in...
[13:33] Repose Lionheart: Agree, Prof
[13:33] herman Bergson: In the God delusion he pleads for a world without religion....which menas a world without supernatural thinking...
[13:33] herman Bergson: Just imagine ...
[13:34] herman Bergson: when we are deprived of our supernatural ideas.....
[13:34] herman Bergson: and you relate that to giving meaning to life...
[13:34] herman Bergson: Philosophically an interesting situation
[13:34] herman Bergson: You could end up in existentialism as an answer for instance
[13:35] itsme Frederix: thats fast thinking ...
[13:35] Quizzle Mode: Or maybe rethinking God? a logical, moral God of Kant?
[13:35] herman Bergson: problem is Quizzle....that God belongs to the supernatural thinking...
[13:36] Quizzle Mode: surely there are arguments on both sides to prove and disprove God?
[13:36] herman Bergson: A lot of philosophers have tried to "proof " the existence of god....with no success
[13:37] itsme Frederix: I guess its more exact to say that the God idea is for some people a supernatural idea, like thunder is/was - and many ideas/intuition in childhood
[13:37] Quizzle Mode: We cannot argue from a point of no God (or otherwise) if we cannot prove he/it does not exist?
[13:37] Bejiita Imako: there is some thing i reward before about i think was called Intelligent Design, that we are so advanced that something MUST have created it , cant possibly be created by itself like that
[13:37] Jozen Ocello: that's an interesting way to see it, Quizzle :)
[13:37] Bejiita Imako: a modern god theory
[13:38] herman Bergson: Intelligent Design is also supernatural thinking...
[13:38] Quizzle Mode: (btw I do not believe in a God, but philosophy is not about arguing beliefs yes?)
[13:38] itsme Frederix: A lot of guys has tried to prove the non existense of God, how can you prove non-existence hats idiot
[13:38] herman Bergson: To prove the non existence is nonsense , in my opinion ^_^
[13:38] herman Bergson: But to proof the existence....
[13:38] herman Bergson: we have no scientific method what soever...
[13:39] herman Bergson: what are we investigating...
[13:39] herman Bergson: of what substance is ggod made...
[13:39] herman Bergson: and if he is not a substance in the natural way....
[13:39] Bejiita Imako: like a ghost or something
[13:39] herman Bergson: how do we happen to have knowledge about this non material substance???
[13:40] itsme Frederix: well ,we have knowledge about non-euclidian spaces
[13:40] herman Bergson: what method or sense did you use to obtain true knowledge about this non material substance?
[13:40] Repose Lionheart: The very word "God" is so nebulous it is unarguable without so precisely defining the term that the discussion becomes unproductive because of its specificity
[13:41] herman Bergson: True Repose
[13:41] itsme Frederix: Thats interesting - true knowledge as distinction from knowledge!
[13:41] Bejiita Imako: ah
[13:41] herman Bergson: dont play with the words Itsme^_^
[13:41] Jozen Ocello: i agree Repose... that is probably why when one says he/she believes in Santa, people will say s/he is crazy, but when one says he/she doesn't believe in God...
[13:41] itsme Frederix: retoric Herman
[13:42] Repose Lionheart: hehehe
[13:42] Bejiita Imako: ㋡
[13:42] Repose Lionheart: yep
[13:43] itsme Frederix: serious, true knowledge might be science, and supernatural knowledge might exist also - well it look like existing in the brain
[13:43] herman Bergson: I dont agree Itsme...
[13:43] herman Bergson: I should have I meant...certain knowledge....
[13:44] herman Bergson: true knowledge is a pleonasm....
[13:44] itsme Frederix: why did you use true knowledge then?
[13:44] herman Bergson: I apologize for my sloppy way of expressing myself ^_^
[13:44] itsme Frederix: np, I accept
[13:44] Repose Lionheart: oh, not heard of a here I come ㋡
[13:45] Jozen Ocello: me too .. let me know when you find it Repose :)
[13:45] itsme Frederix: green grass, white snow
[13:45] herman Bergson: It means that you add an adjective to a noun that already implies the quality..
[13:46] Jozen Ocello: aaahhhh
[13:46] herman Bergson: for instance the expression black raven...
[13:46] Repose Lionheart: pleonasm is understood to mean a word or phrase which is useless, clichéd, or repetitive, but a pleonasm can also be simply an unremarkable use of idiom
[13:46] herman Bergson: a raven is always you are saying too much...
[13:46] Repose Lionheart: yes, Prof ㋡
[13:46] Bejiita Imako: yep
[13:47] herman Bergson: Anyway....
[13:47] herman Bergson: Our discussion shows that we may expect interesting questions for the future...
[13:47] herman Bergson: touching very sensitive issues...
[13:48] herman Bergson: So...thank you for your participation today....
[13:48] Repose Lionheart: Thank you, Professor ㋡
[13:48] Jozen Ocello: thanks Prof and thanks everyone for the discussion :)
[13:48] herman Bergson: We'll discuss the Design of the Mind next Thursday...
[13:48] Jozen Ocello: look forward to that
[13:48] itsme Frederix: Herman, could you make a small addendum - the definition of knowledge as you take it?
[13:49] Bejiita Imako: aaa yes¨
[13:49] herman Bergson: in this project knowledge might be regarded to mean scientific knowledge , Itsme
[13:50] herman Bergson: I have no intention to begin a discussion on epistemological issues now :-)
[13:50] itsme Frederix: oke thx, that tells me the playground
[13:50] herman Bergson: good..^_^
[13:50] itsme Frederix: and most certainly I will (try to) respect your borders for knowledge
[13:51] itsme Frederix: thx and bye bye
[13:51] Bejiita Imako: this becomes more and more interesting
[13:51] herman Bergson: the epistemological issues have been discussed in detail in former projects..
[13:51] Bejiita Imako: ㋡
[13:51] herman Bergson: So in this project you have supernatural beliefs against scientific knowledge..
[13:52] herman Bergson: where knowledge can be regarded as formulated in falsifiable hypotheses
[13:53] herman Bergson: ok...
[13:53] herman Bergson: thnx again...class dismissed ^_^
[13:53] Bejiita Imako: aah
[13:53] Repose Lionheart: hehehe...hae to get to my rl school now ㋡
[13:53] Repose Lionheart: afternoon for me
[13:53] Repose Lionheart: see ya
[13:54] CONNIE Eichel: great class professor :)
Enhanced by Zemanta

Friday, September 10, 2010

268: Supersense continued

So the questions we are going to try to answer are: Why do we believe in the supernatural and What is the source of this way of thinking about the world?

In my former lecture I introduced the human faculty of the supersense as a possible answer, as is introduced by Bruce Hood in his book "SuperSense: Why we believe in the Unbelievable" (2009).

Our main focus is the brain and the science behind our beliefs. We want to understand why we believe in the Unbelievable. We will not discuss the question now, whether these beliefs are TRUE of FALSE.

When we have found a plausible answer to our primary question, you yourself can evaluate and maybe better understand our supernatural beliefs.

Yet, the result of such an evaluation can be lean and thin. Beliefs are hard to get hold of. That is how beliefs work. They are hard to change by reasonable arguments. Where does that stubborn way of thinking come from?

We have plenty of examples for that: a person coming back from death, manna (bread) raining from the sky, water that is magically turned into wine, feeding a crowd of hundreds of people with five loaves and two fishes, a man walking on the water.

Because we are part of human culture we are easily inclined to believe that all our beliefs are coming from what others have told us. From childhood on we believe what others tell us, because we trust them.

But there is another explanation for why we believe in the Unbelievable and that is a natural, scientific interpretation, based on the design of our mind.

Design means a structured, organized way of interpreting the world based on the way our brain works.

It is absolutely true that our culture tells unbelievable stories to children, but I don't think that that is the only way how our beliefs come into being. For a long time you believed in Santa Claus; now you probably do not anymore. Something made you change your mind.

The frame of mind of a child brings the child to believe in the supernatural. So it will be very interesting to take a closer look at the development of thinking in the child.

If supersense is part of our natural way of understanding the world, then it will emerge in every child, which is born with this frame of mind.

Bruce says at this point that if so, then it will be almost impossible to ban all supernatural beliefs. Supersense will always be part of our mind.

It is interesting to note that recently there has emerged a strong movement against any religious beliefs. They are regarded as destructive for mankind. You find this point of view in books of Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris, for instance.

Bruce Hood is milder and even asks the question whether it really is necessary to spend great effort on banning all supernatural beliefs. As you may recall, the communist countries did everything in that respect.. Yet, e.g. Poland is one of the most catholic countries in Europe these days.

Maybe the human species even needs this supersense. How do we deal with death, for instance. In many ways: an afterlife, reincarnation, a spiritual merging with the world energy, heaven.

Another thing is that the human is a social animal and to participate in society we have to share conventions: things which we assign a common and special value to.

This can be a banknote, or an original painting of Rembrandt (you can copy it, but that IS a copy, not the real thing). It can be a special place or a church or a stone in Mekka.

If we didn't share these sacred values, the only sacred value which would be left would be ourselves as individual. This would turn society into a Hobbesian world, in which everybody only fights for his own benefits.

[13:24] herman Bergson: Now the floor is yours :-)
[13:24] Daruma Boa: and we have missed that instinct, called supernatural thinking
[13:24] Abraxas Nagy: the floor remains empty
[13:24] Abraxas Nagy: ah
[13:25] Daruma Boa: no
[13:25] Rodney Handrick accepted your inventory offer.
[13:25] herman Bergson: no Daruma…we is there in our brain..physically there..
[13:25] Daruma Boa: no we lost it
[13:25] itsme Frederix: intuition or instinct
[13:25] Daruma Boa: because of the society
[13:25] Daruma Boa: we always think about what others could think about us^^
[13:25] Daruma Boa: instinct
[13:26] herman Bergson: yes..I will get to all these point Daruma in next lectures...
[13:26] Daruma Boa: hey rod
[13:26] Daruma Boa: nearly in time^^
[13:26] herman Bergson: Welcome Rodney
[13:26] Rodney Handrick: hi Daruma
[13:26] Rodney Handrick: hi herman
[13:26] itsme Frederix: I like instinct it gives me a more materialized idea about intuition (kind of source)
[13:26] Bejiita Imako: hi Rodney
[13:26] Daruma Boa: ok
[13:26] Rodney Handrick: hi bejiita
[13:26] Alarice Beaumont: hey Rodney
[13:26] Rodney Handrick: hi alarice
[13:26] Daruma Boa: u need always something to keep in your hands itsme?
[13:27] herman Bergson: What you call instinct Itsme is our brain...
[13:27] Daruma Boa: something that can u grab?
[13:27] itsme Frederix: Danuma YEP, what else is there
[13:27] Daruma Boa: your mind
[13:27] Alarice Beaumont: :-)
[13:27] itsme Frederix: of course I've some hands in my brain
[13:27] AristotleVon Doobie: The only sacred value which would be left would be ourselves as that the first step to those daydreamers who formulate this superlatives of comfort? heaven, proper behavior etc in the indoctrination of their ideology and then the control of the group formed from their persuasion?
[13:27] Daruma Boa: these are only the tools to eat
[13:27] Daruma Boa: drive cars
[13:27] Daruma Boa: kiss e.g.
[13:28] Daruma Boa: use the keyboards^^
[13:28] AristotleVon Doobie: power is at the root of all these supernatural things
[13:28] Daruma Boa: which power?
[13:28] herman Bergson: from an evolutionary point of view Aristotle may be right...
[13:28] herman Bergson: survival...
[13:28] AristotleVon Doobie: the poser of those who formulate the comfort of the supernatural
[13:29] herman Bergson: that is the power
[13:29] Gemma Cleanslate: interesting
[13:29] itsme Frederix: die Wille (Schopenhauer)
[13:29] AristotleVon Doobie: teh desire to have power and its benefits
[13:29] Daruma Boa: yes thats your mind, your thought your wishes
[13:29] herman Bergson: Good reference, Itsme...
[13:29] itsme Frederix: blind power
[13:29] Daruma Boa: treu der wille^^
[13:29] herman Bergson: reference
[13:29] Daruma Boa: true
[13:29] Bejiita Imako: aah
[13:29] Bejiita Imako: yes
[13:29] itsme Frederix: oke sorry to I made it female
[13:30] AristotleVon Doobie: perhaps it all starts innocently
[13:30] herman Bergson: Well..when you refer to Schopenhauer...
[13:30] AristotleVon Doobie: a loved ones dies.....trying to understand
[13:30] herman Bergson: He hadnt the slightest idea about evolution...
[13:30] Daruma Boa: *GIGGLES* :)~~~~
[13:30] AristotleVon Doobie: the concept of heaven is comforting
[13:30] itsme Frederix: But he lived in that time Herman
[13:31] herman Bergson: but he had an intuition about the driving power...he called it the Will...
[13:31] itsme Frederix: But let's follow Ari, I've lost him?!
[13:31] herman Bergson: Darwin called it the survival of the fittest (the best adapted to the environment)
[13:31] AristotleVon Doobie: anyway, the concept is shared with others and then the movement begins
[13:31] herman Bergson: There is a parallel in my opinion
[13:32] itsme Frederix: sure but what thread do we expand in this discussion Schopenhauer/evolution or ...
[13:32] Daruma Boa: sharing to move is important
[13:32] AristotleVon Doobie: like all groups, clicks form and someone has to be in charge
[13:32] herman Bergson: the main focus is the reality of the supersense...
[13:32] Daruma Boa: well its not important who said what
[13:33] Daruma Boa: its importnat what do u think?
[13:33] herman Bergson: the willingness of the human to believe the unbelievable
[13:33] AristotleVon Doobie: then you are told if you do not behave in a certain way , you will be denied heaven
[13:33] Daruma Boa: Schopenhauer is dead^^
[13:33] AristotleVon Doobie: worse yet, if you further misbehave you will go to hell
[13:33] herman Bergson: yes and I am not....
[13:33] Abraxas Nagy: ╔╗╔═╦╗
[13:33] Abraxas Nagy: ║╚╣║║╚╗
[13:33] Abraxas Nagy: ╚═╩═╩═╝
[13:33] Daruma Boa: *GIGGLES* :)~~~~
[13:34] Bejiita Imako: haha
[13:34] herman Bergson: WAIT A MINUTE....
[13:34] Abraxas Nagy: lucky us
[13:34] Daruma Boa: highway to hell
[13:34] herman Bergson: HOLD ON....
[13:34] Alarice Beaumont: lol
[13:34] Abraxas Nagy: acdc
[13:34] Bejiita Imako: hehe
[13:34] AristotleVon Doobie: my point is it is all conjured up for the purpose of controlling others
[13:34] itsme Frederix: I think, its my opinion that Bruce has a point. He comes with some examples/proves that a) supersense is there and b) it could be wired in the brain and c) it is an effective 9in some cases) way of dealing with ... well life
[13:34] Bejiita Imako: that i use often to scare my neighbors
[13:34] Bejiita Imako: lol
[13:34] herman Bergson: What we are talking about is the willingness of the human to believe the unbelievable...
[13:35] AristotleVon Doobie: yes, and the desire for comfort and pleasure is the motivating force to belive
[13:35] Daruma Boa: sometime ari yes
[13:35] Daruma Boa: but that are the ppl, who dont understand the supernatural
[13:35] Abraxas Nagy: all our senses are wired into the brain
[13:36] herman Bergson: Aristotle...(and others)..first ..there are debating rules on the board behind me ^_^
[13:36] AristotleVon Doobie: once the adults take hold of the idea, the children are indoctrinated
[13:36] herman Bergson: and second..Aristotle what is your point?:-)
[13:36] Abraxas Nagy: it builds a view of reality based on it
[13:36] herman Bergson: ok ok...
[13:36] AristotleVon Doobie: the belief of these supernatural events, and their source
[13:36] herman Bergson: I already said...
[13:37] herman Bergson: for that we first have to study the development of thinking....
[13:37] AristotleVon Doobie: yes
[13:37] Abraxas Nagy: exactly
[13:37] AristotleVon Doobie: that is what I suggested
[13:37] AristotleVon Doobie: where the thought begins
[13:37] herman Bergson: and I can tell all are still full of childlike ways of thinking...
[13:37] Alarice Beaumont: experience
[13:37] itsme Frederix: Herman thats ad omium
[13:37] Abraxas Nagy: i bet we are
[13:38] herman Bergson: Itsme that is a matter of fact...
[13:38] Daruma Boa: why give an example
[13:38] AristotleVon Doobie: yes, you can not competely remove that nurturing
[13:38] Alarice Beaumont: exemplified behavior
[13:38] herman Bergson: any form of superstion is childlike thinking..
[13:38] AristotleVon Doobie: it is
[13:38] herman Bergson: and dont you have your personal rituals????
[13:38] Daruma Boa: ;-) why u think that?
[13:38] itsme Frederix: Herman even worse, how can we deny facts. But please prove!
[13:38] AristotleVon Doobie: and is encouraged by those who can benefit from it I believe
[13:38] Daruma Boa: only cos u never made such experiences?
[13:39] herman Bergson: stop that
[13:39] AristotleVon Doobie: :)
[13:39] AristotleVon Doobie: yes sir
[13:39] herman Bergson: no is true...
[13:39] Daruma Boa: what is true in live?
[13:39] herman Bergson: who doesnt have his lucky coin or rabbitfoot...
[13:39] Daruma Boa: there are always 2 sides of the story
[13:40] herman Bergson: or his favorite chair....when I sit there I can do things better...
[13:40] herman Bergson: we are stuffed with tons of such beliefs...
[13:40] Alarice Beaumont: hmm
[13:40] Alarice Beaumont: you think scientists also believe in this? have rabbit foots and that stuff?
[13:41] herman Bergson: Ever walked on the pavement and had the feeling that you had to skip two tiles every step..
[13:41] herman Bergson: No Alarice...we will get to that...that is exactly the point...
[13:41] AristotleVon Doobie: yes, I was told this as a child...step on a crack break you mothers back
[13:41] herman Bergson: our believeds against how we look at science..
[13:41] Gemma Cleanslate: so much is intertwined
[13:42] Daruma Boa: science... that are only stuoied humans as we are
[13:42] Daruma Boa: stupied
[13:42] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ LOL ♥
[13:42] Daruma Boa: with their own view 2 see the world
[13:42] herman Bergson: Right Aristotle...and nice of you , that you obeyed (I hope)
[13:42] Abraxas Nagy: ╔╗╔═╦╗
[13:42] Abraxas Nagy: ║╚╣║║╚╗
[13:42] Abraxas Nagy: ╚═╩═╩═╝
[13:42] Daruma Boa: there is no truth or so
[13:42] Daruma Boa: i think i learned that here^^#
[13:42] AristotleVon Doobie: :)
[13:42] Bejiita Imako: haha
[13:43] Abraxas Nagy: we all have our own truth
[13:43] herman Bergson: I dont agree Daruma...
[13:43] Daruma Boa: mh
[13:43] herman Bergson: no Abraxas we dont
[13:43] Abraxas Nagy: ah
[13:43] AristotleVon Doobie: if truth only cold be had
[13:43] Daruma Boa: i have 5 truths^^
[13:43] AristotleVon Doobie: could
[13:43] herman Bergson: if that were hav etons of other methods to send a rocket to the moon...
[13:44] herman Bergson: dont confuce truth with commandments Daruma ^_^ missed 5 then :-)
[13:44] Alarice Beaumont: ^^
[13:44] Abraxas Nagy: ah but each interprets the world in his own unique wayt
[13:44] Daruma Boa: 42?
[13:44] Daruma Boa: ^^
[13:44] herman Bergson: No Abraxas I dont agree...
[13:45] itsme Frederix: not 42, 20 is the figure these times
[13:45] Daruma Boa: ;-)
[13:45] itsme Frederix: (rubic's cube)
[13:45] Alarice Beaumont: lool
[13:45] Bejiita Imako: haha
[13:45] herman Bergson: The reality around us isnt a matter of subjective interpretation....a bullit is a bullit..beng...hit ..dead
[13:45] Daruma Boa: and in another world
[13:46] Daruma Boa: or dimension perhaps
[13:46] Daruma Boa: who knows?
[13:46] itsme Frederix: supersense
[13:46] Daruma Boa: we not
[13:46] Daruma Boa: or forgot it
[13:46] herman Bergson: there we go….Daruma's supernatural thinking...
[13:46] Daruma Boa: yes i know
[13:46] Daruma Boa: its true
[13:46] Daruma Boa: we n
[13:46] Abraxas Nagy: ah u mean cause and effect
[13:46] Daruma Boa: know nothing
[13:46] Alarice Beaumont: some people just do have a "fine antenna"
[13:46] Abraxas Nagy: causality
[13:46] herman Bergson: the essential characteristic of supernatural thinking is that it defies laws of nature
[13:46] Daruma Boa: so we cant talk really about it
[13:47] itsme Frederix: nothing wrong with it - you can't help (everyone is biased)
[13:47] Daruma Boa: hi jozen
[13:47] herman Bergson: Ther eyou go Alarice...supernatural thinking too
[13:47] Gemma Cleanslate: yes
[13:47] Jozen Ocello: hi Daruma, Hi everyone, so sorry I'm late
[13:47] AristotleVon Doobie: since it defies the laws of nature, why do you suppose it is thought?
[13:48] itsme Frederix: causality is one of those supersense/natural ideas
[13:48] herman Bergson: Here you see..we are loaded with supernatual thinking....
[13:48] herman Bergson: We'll discuss that later Itsme..if you dont mind
[13:48] itsme Frederix: well it came up prof
[13:48] Daruma Boa: next week^
[13:48] Bejiita Imako: aa yes probably, even if i mostly believe in pure science i bet i have a load of these things myself
[13:49] Bejiita Imako: its interesting for sure
[13:49] Bejiita Imako: ㋡
[13:49] herman Bergson: yes Bejiita....if it were only your favorite pen....
[13:49] Daruma Boa: we dont have to put thinking into boxes (schubläden);-)
[13:49] Bejiita Imako: ah
[13:49] Daruma Boa: just think and feel
[13:49] herman Bergson: no Daruma...we have to get it out of the boxes!
[13:49] AristotleVon Doobie: we start collecting baggage from birth, a great deal of it empty
[13:49] itsme Frederix: well some times its better to leave it in the box (pandora)
[13:49] Bejiita Imako: one thing no one takes its my chair at work at the coffee table
[13:49] Daruma Boa: i think, if we would feel more, than to think
[13:50] Bejiita Imako: haha
[13:50] Daruma Boa: ^^^
[13:50] Daruma Boa: a lot would be better
[13:50] herman Bergson: That might be quite true Aristotle...
[13:50] herman Bergson: and empty here means Supernatural
[13:50] Daruma Boa: yes herman let the thinking of the boxes free^^
[13:50] AristotleVon Doobie: :)
[13:50] AristotleVon Doobie: it may behoove us to cast a lot of it off
[13:51] herman Bergson: Well....hearing this discussion.....great...
[13:51] herman Bergson: our next lectures will be wuite interesting then for you....^_^
[13:51] Alarice Beaumont: so.. who of you has a lucky token or something like this?
[13:52] herman Bergson: So..thank you all for you was inspiring..
[13:52] Bejiita Imako: aaa yes
[13:52] Bejiita Imako: really
[13:52] Abraxas Nagy: it sure was
[13:52] AristotleVon Doobie: Thank you Herman :)
[13:52] herman Bergson: class dismissed ^_^
[13:52] Bejiita Imako: look forward to next one
[13:52] Rodney Handrick: yes, interesting
[13:52] Daruma Boa: it was a pleasure
[13:52] Gemma Cleanslate: yes
[13:52] Bejiita Imako: ㋡
[13:52] Alarice Beaumont: great subject to talk about :-)
[13:52] herman Bergson: my pleasure too Daruma..^_^
[13:52] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥
[13:52] Gemma Cleanslate: herman
[13:52] Bejiita Imako: indeed
[13:52] Rodney Handrick: thanks Herman
[13:53] Bejiita Imako: great stuff
[13:53] Daruma Boa: mh^^
[13:53] Jozen Ocello: so sorry i missed this... will read up on it on the blog
[13:53] herman Bergson: ok Jozen....
[13:53] Jozen Ocello: thanks professor :)
[13:53] herman Bergson: Go and spank yourself first ^_^
[13:53] Jozen Ocello: hehe
[13:53] AristotleVon Doobie: LOL
[13:53] Bejiita Imako: lol
Enhanced by Zemanta