307: The Brain and Fear

Emotions and feelings are biological mechanisms, which are the true guides of our doings. Millions of years our ancestors feared predators, were jealous when someone else approached their partner, were overwhelmed when holding a baby.

Emotions that have repeated themselves millions of times through history, imprinted behavior patterns in the brain. And here comes the specialty of the human brain.

The very moment something unusual happens, something out of the ordinary, the old biological mechanisms have no answer.

At such moments the ratio is activated and begins to analyze, evaluate and searching for a solution of the new and unfamiliar situation. We behave intelligent, which means we are able to solve problems.

Through history our ability to solve problems in many areas has increased: our knowledge of our environment, our insights in social behavior, our capacity to come up with technical solutions, our ability to use language for communication.

In spite of al this emotions and feelings are still important instruments for human beings to make life possible. A simple example….. You encounter a snake on your path.

You could start an extensive rational process of analyzing the situation: what snake is it, dangerous? Can I run or is it faster than me and so on.

But what really happens is that you stop immediately and move away, even before you know what kind of snake it is. The presence of the snake is enough to set you in motion.

This way of behavior has proven to more profitable for survival than other approaches of the situation. The behavioral system which is involved here is FEAR, probably the oldest emotion and stronger than our acclaimed ratio.

Darwin published in 1872 "The expression of the emotions in man and animal". It took almost a century before scientists paid attention to this publication.

For a long time the scientific community wasn't that happy with emotions and feelings. They were the core business of artists and poets. It is hardly possible to quantify emotions and feelings, so you can't measure them properly. And besides that…the ratio is in much higher esteem.

So, we teach our children to suppress and control their emotion and be reasonable. We learn that in many situations the best face is a pokerface.

Due to the interdisciplinary approach of human behavior by neuroscientists, evolutionary psychologists, biologists, philosophers , antropologists and others emotions no longer are regarded as jammers and obstacles for the ratio, but as an integral part of our being.

We have a number of words which seems to mean more or less the same: emotions, feelings, moods. So we need to find a good definition of emotion.

Especially because my thesis here is, that emotion is biological system, a behavioral system which is the result of a long evolutionary development. In that sense feelings are just a part of an emotion.

An example: Bergie is tired and wants to go home. It is raining. She has two options: the shortcut through the dark alley or the longer road along main street. She wants to go home and chooses for the dark alley……

In the alley all of a sudden she hears footsteps following her. What will happen? The emotion FEAR comes into action (even half a second before she consciously is aware of it), not a rational analysis of the situation.

In Bergie's brain a number of programs come into action teamwise. Sensory input is enhanced… a sharper ear for the footsteps. Motivations change: keeping hairdo intact isn't important anymore….personal safety is.

To achieve this new information is gathered, not where the pools are, but where can I hide, where are obstacles in her path. Suddenly the waste container isn't evaluated anymore as a dirty object, but as a place to hide behind.

Memory is activated…. did she see somebody when she entered the alley. Did her friends warn her for a rapist? The communication system is fired….should she cry for help? The expression on her face is already one of fear.

Emotions show themselves by feelings, in this case fear, but the emotion is much more than just that feeling. Thence, an emotion is a driving force which as an orchestra conductor ensures that a number of specific behavioral systems run in parallel and work together to solve an acute problem.

The emotion pushes all actions of the person in fear into one direction. And it is through evolution that we have developed this system of emotions, which ensures our survival and ability to live as a social being.


The Discussion

[13:24] herman Bergson: Thank you....
[13:24] Qwark Allen: 1 feeling can do several different emotions at same time
[13:24] herman Bergson: As you may have noticed....
[13:25] herman Bergson: my main goal is to describe the human being as a product of evolution
[13:25] Mick Nerido: Emotions spring from what part of our brain?
[13:25] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): right
[13:25] itsme Frederix: hmm as a product of evolved mechanism
[13:25] herman Bergson: Yes Mick....
[13:26] Mick Nerido: All parts?
[13:26] Bejiita Imako: so emotion is the mechanism itself had feeling is how we well feel it when the emotion kicks in
[13:26] herman Bergson: yes a number of areas in the brain are activated
[13:26] Qwark Allen: there are parts of the brain responsable for that
[13:27] herman Bergson: Exactly Bejiita....
[13:27] herman Bergson: But by definition....
[13:27] Qwark Allen: if they are damaged you may not experience emotions
[13:27] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): emotions being automatic, they are our animal selves....rooted in our brain stem
[13:27] herman Bergson: form my point of view emotion is the conductor of the brain orchestra...
[13:27] herman Bergson: Yes Aristotle....
[13:27] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): I see it the very opposite Herman :)
[13:28] herman Bergson: `the emotion is already triggered before we are consciously aware of it...
[13:28] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): our ratio the conductor
[13:28] Mick Nerido: ratio is rational only?
[13:28] herman Bergson: No Aristotle....
[13:28] Bejiita Imako: and when we become aware we get the feeling from that emotion ex joy panic and so on
[13:29] itsme Frederix: Herman, but who is the composer - environment?
[13:29] Mick Nerido: Perhaps we have co-conductors?
[13:29] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): emotion is the train, ratio the engineer
[13:29] herman Bergson: The composer is evolution Itsme..the eternal interaction between organism and environment
[13:29] herman Bergson: I do not agree Aristotle....
[13:30] herman Bergson: Ratio is a mechanism that kicks in when we are in a new , unknown situation...
[13:30] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): hmm, which is cart and which is horse
[13:30] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): :-)
[13:30] herman Bergson: A situation we cannot handle by just reacting out of fear or anger or grief etc.
[13:31] itsme Frederix: Herman if ratio kicks in when the situation is new, the next time this rational behavior is programmed and wired as a "emotion"?
[13:31] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): isn't fear, anger, lust etc automatic responses to stimuli?
[13:31] herman Bergson: The basic point here is, that the ratio is overestimated in its role with respect to survival
[13:32] itsme Frederix: I agree
[13:32] herman Bergson: sure Aristotle
[13:32] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): yes that is so true]
[13:32] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): and rationally we control them?
[13:32] herman Bergson: No...
[13:33] herman Bergson: evolutionary seen...the emotion of fear, the behavioral mechanism to run for danger was developed before the brain part that produces the ratio was in place..
[13:33] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): yes, I agree with that
[13:34] herman Bergson: almost all animals experience fear...and act accordingly.....they don't need a ratio to survive
[13:34] Mick Nerido: So we have an old boss and a new boss
[13:34] herman Bergson: exactly Mick
[13:34] itsme Frederix: on this RET is based as making you aware why you are acting
[13:34] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): the aggressive behavior to combat fear is released by our rational thought
[13:35] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): or not
[13:35] herman Bergson: of course the ratio can interfere with any emotion...
[13:35] herman Bergson: That will differ from person to person....
[13:36] herman Bergson: Some people even hardly experience fear....
[13:36] herman Bergson: and become movie stuntmen ^_^
[13:36] Bejiita Imako: hehe
[13:36] Bejiita Imako: or jackass idiots
[13:36] Mick Nerido: lol
[13:36] Bejiita Imako: haha
[13:36] itsme Frederix: all depends on how things are evolved in the brain and DNA has selected it
[13:36] herman Bergson: lol indeed Bejiita
[13:36] Mick Nerido: adreline junkies
[13:36] herman Bergson: yes Itsme
[13:37] Bejiita Imako: ㋡
[13:37] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): fearless and stupidity sometimes are the same sometimes
[13:37] itsme Frederix: and there is no cause and no goal with evolution it just goes
[13:37] herman Bergson: if stupidity means 'lack of ratio' you are right Aristotle
[13:38] Mick Nerido: ts like Emotions is driving while ratio is in the back seat giving directions
[13:38] herman Bergson: indeed Itsme...I agree with that
[13:38] herman Bergson: yes Aristotle......
[13:39] itsme Frederix: Mick I like that but ... you still postpone a superior ratio!
[13:39] herman Bergson: I agree with Mick.....
[13:39] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): and survival or not :)
[13:40] herman Bergson: A lot of what we call consciousness is a talk or justification afterwards...
[13:40] herman Bergson: But we need that
[13:40] itsme Frederix: So the problem Mick is giving us .... are we in a taxi/cap ordering the destination or ...
[13:41] herman Bergson: Well Itsme..let me put it in a philsophical way....
[13:41] itsme Frederix: your welcome
[13:42] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): well, my analogy would be emotions are wild broncos, the ratio is the cowboy with spurs on top
[13:42] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ LOL ♥
[13:42] herman Bergson: The greatest mystery ever at this moment is how this 1400cc of grey mass in our skull can produce something what we experience as subjective consciousness..
[13:42] Bejiita Imako: hhshahaha
[13:42] Mick Nerido: good Aristotle
[13:43] Bejiita Imako: trying to control it
[13:43] herman Bergson: In some cases that is the picture Aristotle....
[13:43] itsme Frederix: Herman right you are, the other problem is ... is this subjective consiousness in charge or just a farce
[13:43] herman Bergson: But in the described situation of fear for instance it is not.....
[13:43] Bejiita Imako: or a more technically variant
[13:44] herman Bergson: Yes Itsme....a killing question!!!!!!!
[13:44] Bejiita Imako: emotion is like the fission reaction in a nuclear plant and the control rods are the ratio and left by itself it would runaway causing a meltdown and go out of control
[13:44] Bejiita Imako: lust like if emotion is left out of control
[13:44] Bejiita Imako: just
[13:45] itsme Frederix: You know sometimes you've to put the head under the covers (in the sand) to keep it above the water
[13:45] Bejiita Imako: at least in some way
[13:45] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ LOL ♥
[13:45] Mick Nerido: We all agree more is going on in our minds than we know
[13:45] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): itsme
[13:45] Bejiita Imako: haha
[13:45] herman Bergson: That is the rational picture Bejiita....
[13:45] herman Bergson: Emotions already took care of our survival before the ratio entered the arena...
[13:46] itsme Frederix: So the question rises Herman, is ratio a separate aspect or just a tricky emotion?
[13:46] herman Bergson: The point is that the ratio comes into play when basic emotional responses to a situation do not lead to a solution....then we have the "think"
[13:46] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): history has proven that we can survive without ratio, do you suppose we can survive without emotion?
[13:47] herman Bergson: No we cant Aristotle...
[13:47] Mick Nerido: not with much fun
[13:47] Bejiita Imako: ratio i guess is a controller to throttle emotions sort of
[13:47] itsme Frederix: Ari there is no survival without emotion, you would not have the good feeling of it without emotion
[13:47] herman Bergson: all animals are driven by emotions in the sense as we define it here...
[13:47] Bejiita Imako: getting us to think about it logically instead of panicing
[13:48] herman Bergson: animals can have fear, can experience joy and jealousy...
[13:48] Bejiita Imako: ex that example why some people when they see a mouse jump up on a chair and scream instead of thinking rationally that wait mouses aren't dangerous
[13:49] Bejiita Imako: I think they are cute
[13:49] itsme Frederix: Bej that is woman behavior
[13:49] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): uh oh
[13:49] Bejiita Imako: as long they don't crawl from a stinky sewer
[13:49] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): phooey
[13:49] herman Bergson: that sidifficult to determine Bejiita...it can be learnt behavior...
[13:49] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): did Itsme say that?
[13:49] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): it is a myth
[13:49] Qwark Allen: heee
[13:49] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ LOL ♥
[13:49] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): yes he did
[13:49] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): hmmm
[13:49] itsme Frederix: Ari just to get some reaction -
[13:49] Bejiita Imako: hehe well yes mostly featured in cartoons
[13:49] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): :)
[13:50] Bejiita Imako: with mouse hunting theme
[13:50] Doggersbank Timmerman (henk.aristocrat): and i think animals have some sort of ratio too. look at lab-rats, monkeys, squirrels. most of the time it is to solve the problem of how to get food
[13:50] Bejiita Imako: and often some lazy cat
[13:50] Bejiita Imako: hha
[13:50] itsme Frederix: so please forgive me and mark it not said
[13:50] herman Bergson: Well…referring to a stinky sewer is something else....
[13:50] herman Bergson: We'll get to that when we'll discuss the emotion of disgust
[13:50] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): :)
[13:50] Bejiita Imako: then mice or btw rats are not too nice
[13:50] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): they are not so bad either
[13:51] Bejiita Imako: but by themselves can be ok
[13:51] herman Bergson: Rats can be very kind animals....
[13:51] Bejiita Imako: yes
[13:51] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): I think that rationally we rely on gathered empical data as to how we reacto to certain dangers
[13:52] herman Bergson: I once had a student in my class with her rat crawling all over her....and into her shirt etc. ^_^
[13:52] Bejiita Imako: hehe
[13:52] :: Beertje :: (beertje.beaumont): :)
[13:52] Bejiita Imako: they can be cuddly
[13:52] Bejiita Imako: ㋡
[13:52] itsme Frederix: Ari, but don't forget that very a-rational projections can be made out of empiracal dat
[13:52] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): rats are a very popular pet in the US now
[13:53] herman Bergson: they wer ein Europe a few years ago
[13:53] Qwark Allen: l ☺ ☻ ☺ l
[13:53] Qwark Allen: lol
[13:53] herman Bergson: The basic idea here is that what we define as emotions here are found inall human beings all over the world...
[13:54] herman Bergson: in that sense we are all alike...
[13:54] herman Bergson: Like all elephants are elephants on all continents we humans are justlike that...
[13:54] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): but I do not react to rats and snakes the way others might, so I think it is a basic fear that is diluted with personal experience
[13:55] herman Bergson: Aristotle.....you always have to keep in mind the bell shape curve of statistical distribution....
[13:55] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): time to go
[13:55] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): thanks herman
[13:55] Bejiita Imako: cu gemma
[13:55] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): bye Gemma
[13:55] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): hope to be here thursday'
[13:55] :: Beertje :: (beertje.beaumont): bye Gemma
[13:56] herman Bergson: Oh dear...lots track of time Gemma ^_^
[13:56] itsme Frederix: Herman, and keep in mind not every thing is bell-shaped (gaussian) there are black swans
[13:56] bergfrau Apfelbaum: byebye Gemma :-)
[13:56] herman Bergson: Ok Itsme....we'll discuss that later... :-)
[13:56] Qwark Allen: ¸¸.☆´ ¯¨☆.¸¸`☆** **☆´ ¸¸.☆¨¯`☆ H E R MA N ☆´ ¯¨☆.¸¸`☆** **☆´ ¸¸.☆¨¯`
[13:56] Qwark Allen: was very intersting as usual
[13:56] Qwark Allen: thank you
[13:56] bergfrau Apfelbaum: and byebye Qwark -)
[13:56] Bejiita Imako: yess
[13:57] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): I like Black Swans better
[13:57] herman Bergson: Thank you all for your participation....it was good again...
[13:57] herman Bergson: Class dismissed ....
[13:57] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): Thank you, Professor
[13:57] Qwark Allen: i wonder where evolution is getting us
[13:57] Doggersbank Timmerman (henk.aristocrat): ㋡
[13:57] Bejiita Imako: ㋡
[13:57] Doggersbank Timmerman (henk.aristocrat): thanks Herman
[13:57] bergfrau Apfelbaum: ***** APPPPPPPLLLLAAAUUUSSSSEEEEEEE***********
[13:57] :: Beertje :: (beertje.beaumont): Thank you Herman it was very intersting
[13:57] herman Bergson: yes Qwark....it has no direction tho
[13:57] bergfrau Apfelbaum: ty herman
[13:57] Bejiita Imako: Hooo!!!
[13:57] Bejiita Imako: Hoooo!
[13:57] Bejiita Imako: yes
[13:57] Qwark Allen: see you next class
[13:58] Bejiita Imako: cu soon
[13:58] Doggersbank Timmerman (henk.aristocrat): goodbye everybody
[13:58] herman Bergson: Bye Bejiita
[13:58] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): bye Bejiita
[13:58] :: Beertje :: (beertje.beaumont): bye Bejiita
[13:58] :: Beertje :: (beertje.beaumont): bye bye have a nice evening
[13:58] bergfrau Apfelbaum: byebye class :-)) see you Thursday
[13:58] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): a wonderful lecture Herman
[13:58] herman Bergson: Bye Beertje :-)
[13:59] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): bye bergie, stay out of dark alleys
[13:59] herman Bergson: Thank you Aristotle
[13:59] bergfrau Apfelbaum: byebye Aristotle :-))
[13:59] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): :)
[13:59] bergfrau Apfelbaum: lol
[13:59] Aristotle von Doobie (aristotlevon.doobie): good bye all
[14:00] bergfrau Apfelbaum: byebye itsyou :-) und alles liebe!
[14:00] bergfrau Apfelbaum: ≧▽≦ baba ≧▽≦
[14:00] bergfrau Apfelbaum: herman:-) wir lesen uns
[14:01] itsme Frederix: bye

287: The Brain and Religion 2

Last Tuesday I ended my lecture with these words: "With the evolution of modern man there have emerged five characteristic behaviors, which you find in all cultures: language, the making of tools, music, art and religion.

Of all these behaviors we have found predecessors in the animal kingdom, except religion. Yet, mankind survived, so we only can conclude that religion must have had an evolutionary advantage for the homo sapiens."

Did religion help the species Homo sapiens to survive? To get to a clear answer we have to be more specific from an evolutionary point of view.

The brain is wired in such a way that it has the capacity to generate spiritual ideas and concepts. This means that we are willing to believe that there is more than just what we see.

With which spiritual ideas the individual brain comes up with is unpredictable, but we have to take another factor into account. The Homo sapiens is a social animal, so he lives in groups.

We all know about group dynamics, be it chicken, wolves or humans. There always is a dominating individual member or a small group of dominating members. It is obvious that the dominating group members dictate which ideas prevail.

When spiritual, supernatural ideas are institutionalized you get a religion, a set of ideas that is accepted by all members of the group or tribe and thence comes the evolutionary advantage.

In the first place religion keeps a group together. The Jews, for instance, have survived due to their religious beliefs in spite of the diaspora and holocaust.

For leaders religion is a perfect instrument. Like Seneca (ca. 54 BC – ca. 39 AD) said: " Simple minded people regard religion as true, wise people as false and rulers as useful"

And thence come the rules for the group: it is not allowed to marry someone who does not share your religion. Social control by threatening with all kinds of punishments from above.

You have to be recognizable as true believer. So you show this in your clothing, black clothes, a keppel, a burke. And of course you have to make as many children as possible. A common rule in many religions.

Religion brings comfort to people in hard times (even when they are caused by a merciless ruler). And when life is that bad, there always is a better afterlife waiting for the believer.

100.000 years ago homo sapiens already believed in an afterlife. This can be concluded from what was put in the graves of the dead: food, tools, jewelry.

These are all perfect ingredients to protect the group and kill the infidel, that is…..competing groups or tribes, who threaten your resources and survival. Killing in the name of your god is allowed then.

Even today we see these mechanisms at work. Not just in one religion: weird sects, which commit collective suicide, terrorism inspired by the Koran or the Bible, xenophobia, discrimination of certain groups in the collective… and so on.

Would the world be better off without religion? Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris would immediately say : YES! But is this true?

When you look at the Evolution chart on the wall to the left of me, you can see that homo sapiens exists in fact only for a short time compared to other species.

Our evolution has hardly begun. So the right question would be…What will be the role of religion (in a globalized world) in 100.000 years?

Spirituality is hard wired in the brain. There is proof of that even from prehistoric man. Institutionalizing individual spirituality is a next step in culture.

Some of these institutions are already decaying these days…. maybe a sign that a more scientific view on reality is more appealing and appropriate?


The Discussion

[13:19] herman Bergson: Thank you....
[13:19] herman Bergson: You have the floor :-)
[13:19] AristotleVon Doobie: brb
[13:19] Bejiita Imako: oki
[13:20] BALDUR Joubert: where can i find scientific basis for your assumption that spirituality is hard wired in the brain
[13:20] herman Bergson: looks around
[13:20] herman Bergson: any questions or remarks?
[13:20] Simargl Talaj: Animals don't pray.
Humanity creates its gods.
So, faith's good for us?
[13:20] Simargl Talaj: Cats eat what they kill.
Only humans torture, gloat.
Torture's good for us?
[13:21] Simargl Talaj: Existence of traits
not proof they are adaptive
stains: didn't wash out.
[13:21] BALDUR Joubert: cat's torture too -in our sense..
[13:21] herman Bergson: those are non sequiturs Siargl...
[13:21] BALDUR Joubert: ever saw a cat play with a mouse?
[13:21] herman Bergson: No logic in that
[13:21] herman Bergson: Oh yes...
[13:22] herman Bergson: a cat can play with a mouse for an hour without killing it...
[13:22] herman Bergson: and afeterwords it even doesnt eat it
[13:22] Gemma Cleanslate: ▓▒░ ♪♫♩ ॐ ॐ ॐ ((-: QWARK :-)) ॐ ॐ ॐ ♪♫♩ ▓▒░
[13:22] Gemma Cleanslate: is ill so went to bed
[13:22] herman Bergson: awww...poor felllow...
[13:22] Bejiita Imako: aaaw
[13:22] Gemma Cleanslate: right that is true
[13:23] AristotleVon Doobie: honing its killing skils, and doent need them mostly today
[13:23] AristotleVon Doobie: the primal brain in action
[13:23] BALDUR Joubert: right ari...like wolves who will kill as many sheep as possible in a heard
[13:24] Bejiita Imako: ah
[13:24] Gemma Cleanslate: some animals only kill when they need to eat
[13:24] Simargl Talaj: My dog hopes, pleads, thanks
me, my opposible thumbs.
Am I not his god?
[13:24] AristotleVon Doobie: we are the same, only with rationality to curb the play killing, or ideally
[13:24] BALDUR Joubert: you're an alpha for your dog sim
[13:25] herman Bergson: No Simargl....dogs have no supernatural ideas...
[13:25] herman Bergson: you are just the dominant member of the group
[13:25] AristotleVon Doobie: we teach our children how to, still
[13:25] BALDUR Joubert: how to do what ari
[13:25] AristotleVon Doobie: like religion is taught from the cradle
[13:26] AristotleVon Doobie: to kill, to survive primally
[13:26] BALDUR Joubert: you do ari?
[13:26] herman Bergson: Yes Aristotle..that is the idea of my lecture todya....
[13:26] herman Bergson: and the former one..
[13:26] herman Bergson: Religion is a good tool to control the group...
[13:26] itsme Frederix: So you have a mission Herman?
[13:26] AristotleVon Doobie: I do not, but I have seen the results of the behavior up close....most just follow the path handed to them from the previous generation
[13:27] herman Bergson: on the other hand...the group loves to believe all in the same ideas
[13:27] Simargl Talaj: God, too tall to see
Mysterious can opener
faith: imagined alphas
[13:27] itsme Frederix: and its a nessecarity!
[13:27] AristotleVon Doobie: religion is like collective comfort food
[13:27] BALDUR Joubert: how did religion start?
[13:27] Beertje Beaumont: it's safe
[13:28] herman Bergson: Save me your mystic can openers Simargl
[13:28] herman Bergson: In a simple way Baldur...
[13:28] AristotleVon Doobie: we find safety in being surrounded by like kind
[13:28] herman Bergson: The brain searches for patterns, structures, order...
[13:28] itsme Frederix: you are all to sceptic (is it me that is saying this) religion also has an association with a deeper feeling for sense (supersense), its in us
[13:29] BALDUR Joubert: well.. i'm thinking 100000 years ago when a group consisted of a larger family of 4-to 10 memebers
[13:29] herman Bergson: yes Itsme...I dont deny that...
[13:29] AristotleVon Doobie: it is in us from somewhere, I cant aruge that
[13:29] AristotleVon Doobie: but where is the question for me
[13:29] Bejiita Imako: hmm that is possible for sure
[13:29] herman Bergson: One half of our brain loves to come up with supernatural ideas to understand the world around us
[13:29] itsme Frederix: then lets be possitive about our selves and what is experience but stay critical to official who miss use the thing
[13:30] BALDUR Joubert: language was at the most very primitive
[13:30] herman Bergson: Well...just look at the situation....
[13:30] BALDUR Joubert: questions of survival must have been predominant..
[13:30] herman Bergson: Yes baldur...
[13:31] herman Bergson: you are in a situation you dont understand and you have to move fast...
[13:31] herman Bergson: The left hemisphere of the brain does that...is intuitive....
[13:31] BALDUR Joubert: i do?
[13:31] itsme Frederix: its is heuristic (it worked well several times, so lets do it again)
[13:32] herman Bergson: yes Itsme....
[13:32] BALDUR Joubert: doing by learning .....
[13:32] herman Bergson: rational thinking and analysis is slow..takes time....
[13:32] itsme Frederix: procedural behaviour
[13:32] herman Bergson: not the tool to survive when in immediate danger
[13:32] BALDUR Joubert: a 100000 years ago it would not only be slow..
[13:33] BALDUR Joubert: but limited
[13:33] herman Bergson: No Baldur..it was hardly used...then
[13:33] itsme Frederix: still limitted ;)
[13:33] BALDUR Joubert: lol..
[13:33] herman Bergson: tool making is an example of rational thinking...
[13:33] BALDUR Joubert: so what was the tool for survival..
[13:34] BALDUR Joubert: in immediate danger..
[13:34] herman Bergson: the brain Baldur...
[13:34] BALDUR Joubert: of course.. that goes for almost any animal
[13:34] AristotleVon Doobie: primal instinct are instantly available, rationally we temper those based on the situation
[13:35] BALDUR Joubert: may be before we think of rational we should think of reasoning?
[13:35] herman Bergson: The first thing we do is think intuitively...
[13:35] BALDUR Joubert: primal instincts are rational.. if the species survives..:)
[13:36] herman Bergson: rationality comes later
[13:36] AristotleVon Doobie: desire for an attractive, potential mate in the middle of a restaurant is tempered by empirical data we have gathered
[13:36] herman Bergson: that is also what you see in the development of mind
[13:36] BALDUR Joubert: coward ari lol
[13:36] AristotleVon Doobie: LOL
[13:36] Bejiita Imako: haha
[13:36] AristotleVon Doobie: but in many other instances also
[13:37] herman Bergson: what kind of restaurant was that Aristotle?
[13:37] AristotleVon Doobie: :))
[13:37] Bejiita Imako: :)¨
[13:37] herman Bergson: Was she on the menu?
[13:37] BALDUR Joubert: may be the empirical data you have is a slap in the face?
[13:37] AristotleVon Doobie: a family one, who dictate 'n'
[13:37] AristotleVon Doobie: no
[13:37] AristotleVon Doobie: lol
[13:37] AristotleVon Doobie: would dictate a 'no'
[13:38] AristotleVon Doobie: yes, that is right BAlDUR
[13:38] Bejiita Imako: hehe
[13:38] herman Bergson: Well I notice that nobody has really questions about what I put forward..
[13:38] BALDUR Joubert: as you see humans can share experiences:)
[13:38] Simargl Talaj: I promised silence
or haiku; useful thoughts, no --
alas, too many words.
[13:39] AristotleVon Doobie: my point of course is we control our instincts by rationality
[13:39] herman Bergson: And Simargl has her poetic moments here..^_^
[13:39] herman Bergson: ok
[13:39] herman Bergson: Yes Aristotle....
[13:39] BALDUR Joubert: so what do you think about religion sim..
[13:39] AristotleVon Doobie: or yield to them, in the same manor
[13:39] herman Bergson: That is the battle between the right and left hemisphere of the brain
[13:39] BALDUR Joubert: in prose ..:)
[13:40] herman Bergson: But from an evolutionary point of view, the intuitive thinking may have come first
[13:40] itsme Frederix: well Herman that a simplified drawing you made up
[13:40] AristotleVon Doobie: yes I agree Herman
[13:40] herman Bergson: yes Itsme..I love to keep it simple ^_^
[13:41] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ LOL ♥
[13:41] itsme Frederix: me too, I stay with the appelpijnboomklier
[13:41] AristotleVon Doobie: the KISS theory
[13:41] herman Bergson: Descartes Itsme?
[13:41] herman Bergson: Dualism?
[13:41] itsme Frederix: Good guess, yes
[13:42] herman Bergson: Interesting
[13:42] BALDUR Joubert: descartes and kisses?
[13:42] herman Bergson: And it wasnt a guess :-)
[13:42] itsme Frederix: Baldur he shove himself (the barber did not)
[13:42] BALDUR Joubert: ok...
[13:42] itsme Frederix: shove ? shaved
[13:43] BALDUR Joubert: probably cut himself..
[13:43] herman Bergson: But Itsme..to get it straight....you hold that dualism is what reality is ?
[13:44] itsme Frederix: well we have only a small interval (80 years) to think about it and feel concerned, then its over and another has the burden
[13:44] herman Bergson: I mean the reality of body and mind?
[13:44] itsme Frederix: Herman, sure not
[13:44] herman Bergson: sorry...I misunderstood I guess
[13:44] itsme Frederix: just kidding and making it more simple, not left not right but just one piece of the body
[13:45] BALDUR Joubert: if only the body were one piece .....
[13:45] herman Bergson: But one thing is for sure....
[13:45] itsme Frederix: i go for TAO, it just goes
[13:45] herman Bergson: in relation to evolution...our personal existence is just the blink of an eye
[13:46] herman Bergson: while we have the feeling that we are IT, complete ..all human
[13:46] itsme Frederix: That right Herman, and sometimes that is a burden we all have to deal with
[13:47] herman Bergson: Just nice to know it only takes about 80 years :-)
[13:47] itsme Frederix: yes that helps
[13:47] herman Bergson: smiles
[13:47] herman Bergson: ok...my friends
[13:47] Gemma Cleanslate: ok
[13:47] Simargl Talaj: Just to kiss Descarte
can be done without a word
More takes *two* paragraphs.
[13:47] itsme Frederix: a tiny tiny bit
[13:47] herman Bergson: next lecture will be on religious experiences....
[13:48] Gemma Cleanslate: ah
[13:48] Bejiita Imako: ok
[13:48] itsme Frederix: More is writing about Utopia
[13:48] herman Bergson: not coming form above but created by magnetism...:-)
[13:48] itsme Frederix: just be
[13:48] herman Bergson: So Thank you all for you r participation
[13:48] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥
[13:48] Bejiita Imako: ㋡
[13:48] Gemma Cleanslate: interesting
[13:48] BALDUR Joubert: omg.. magnetism? messmer?
[13:49] herman Bergson: Class dismisssed :-)
[13:49] AristotleVon Doobie: Thank you, Professor
[13:49] Bejiita Imako: hehe ok
[13:49] Bejiita Imako: interesting as usual ㋡
[13:49] Gemma Cleanslate: yes very
[13:49] bergfrau Apfelbaum: ty herman!! &Class
[13:49] Simargl Talaj: Thank you. You do great preparation for our benefit. It is a great gift.
[13:49] herman Bergson: No Baldur...a real scientist
[13:49] Gemma Cleanslate: see you Tuesday
[13:49] AristotleVon Doobie: oh........the body is a mass of tissue, manipulated by the brain as directed by the mind
[13:49] herman Bergson: no Aristotle....
[13:49] AristotleVon Doobie: trilogism?
[13:50] herman Bergson: that is the homunculus theory...lol
[13:50] itsme Frederix: or worse Ari, the other way around, just surviving DNA
[13:50] herman Bergson: do you ever learn...lol
[13:50] BALDUR Joubert: other way round ari--
[13:50] AristotleVon Doobie: LOL
[13:50] Bejiita Imako: hehe
[13:51] BALDUR Joubert: and do'nt forget brain is nothing more than a mass of tissue too:)

273: Hard to believe

"All human knowledge begins with intuitions, proceeds thence to concepts, and ends with ideas." ; That is what Immanuel Kant says in his "Critique of Pure Reason "(1781).

I think, that this is a example of a perfect understanding of the mind. And this in 1781, when there didn't exist any knowledge of the brain or neurobiology. Even Kant already understood that the brain had a life of its own.

In the former lecture I concluded that we can distinguish three belief-systems: Science, Religion and the profane supernatural. As Kant says, they begin with intuitions.

They end up with ideas, but are these ideas ideas about the world around us in the sense that we may call it knowledge? In fact, the only belief-system that leads to knowledge about reality is science. And science is based on logic and rationality.

However, this conviction has lead to the belief, that science is the safest way to deal with the world around us. Just look what we have achieved in technology, physics or in medicines and healthcare.

From an evolutionary point of view this may be right, so what to do with the supernatural part of our thinking. In 2006 Richard Dawkins had an outspoken opinion about it in his book "The God Delusion".

-QUOTE-
"I decry supernaturalism in all its forms, and the most effective way to proceed will be to concentrate on the form most likely familiar to my readers—the form that impinges most threateningly on all our societies. . . .

I am attacking God, all gods, anything and everything supernatural, wherever and whenever they have been or will be invented."
-END QUOTE-

But does this attack make sense or is it fighting windmills like our well known Don Quichotte did? I think it is fighting windmills due to the design of our mind.

Supernatural beliefs may emerge spontaneously in children as they develop as a natural by-product of their mind design. These beliefs do not need to come from culture.

For a great part religious beliefs come from education. Children are easy to believe what others tell them, but on the other hand our brain is strongly inclined to accept these beliefs too.

A good example of such a the belief is creationism. From childhood on our basic intuition about the world is, that it is organized as it is in dead matter, living creatures, plants , insects, animals, humans….

As a child you have no other experience than that the world was there, is there and tomorrow will there be too. Because the mind is inclined to supernatural beliefs, it is quite willing to believe that this was created just like that at some given moment.

Our minds are naturally inclined to a creationist view. After all, creationism was created by the human mind, whereas evolution by natural selection is a fact that was discovered.

How can the complexity of design emerge without a designer? That is what our mind can not grasp, because experience tells us that for instance building a car is a very complex process which starts with a designer and a design.

A second thing is that our mind is not able to understand is the possibility of an evolution taking millions of years. In our short live the best we can experience is the birth of a baby and witness its development, which means it just grows up…Nothing new emerges. All was there from the beginning…head hands, toes and so on.

So evolution theory is contrary to our intuitions. The fact that we are genetically equal for 98% with a chimpanzee and even for 50% with a banana, we still have trouble to believe for us that all life in all its diversity came from the same basic matter.

Let alone, that we easily can believe that all this diversity and complexity emerged in a rather random process of evolution over a period of million years. Our intuition is that developments must have a goal, isn't it?

Despite all efforts, we must conclude that it is not feasible to try to ban all kinds of supernatural thinking, including religion. It is in our genes.

To quote Bruce Hood: "The geneticist Dean Hamer has even identified a gene, vesicular monoamine transporter 2, or VMAT2, that is linked to the personality traits of spirituality.

He found that in a survey of over two hundred people including twins, those who share religiosity also share VMAT2. This gene controls a number of the brain chemicals responsible for controlling moods.

Neuroscientists such as Andrew Newberg have even made progress toward identifying the relevant neural circuitry that is activated during religious experiences, again suggesting a brain-based account for the spiritual.So maybe our brains and our own unique mind design determine whether we believe or not."

And did you ever realize that Second Life has supernatural traits. Ever seen two avatars hug? And you there at the keyboard, what do you see and feel? Just pixels moving on a screen or do you experience more?


The Discussion

[13:25] Gemma Cleanslate: :-)
[13:26] herman Bergson: Thank you....
[13:26] herman Bergson: If you have a question or remark..plz feel free
[13:26] Bejiita Imao: ah
[13:26] Gemma Cleanslate: did you see that Stephen Hawkings has a new book out that explains that the universe could come without a creator??
[13:27] herman Bergson: and it was a woman who smiled....^_^
[13:27] Gemma Cleanslate: he is not saying that there is not one
[13:27] herman Bergson: Yes Hawkins is a problem...
[13:27] Gemma Cleanslate: he is just saying that there is proof that there is a possibililty that it was not necessary
[13:27] Adriana Jinn: don't you think that intuition is totally apart
[13:27] herman Bergson: Yes...a bit weird argument...
[13:28] herman Bergson: one thing...
[13:28] herman Bergson: it is chaos among cosmologists…any theory goes...
[13:28] herman Bergson: that string theory is just nothing..
[13:28] herman Bergson: here we see the same thing as in understanding evolution...
[13:29] herman Bergson: our brain cant understand it....
[13:29] Gemma Cleanslate: very true
[13:29] herman Bergson: just simple example...
[13:29] Bejiita Imako: aaa yes hard to grasp
[13:29] herman Bergson: they talk about a big bang....
[13:29] herman Bergson: inmy opinion..complete bull
[13:29] Bejiita Imako: hmm im not sure about it either
[13:30] Bejiita Imako: I hope the LHC will shed some light on it
[13:30] herman Bergson: for that big bang had to take place WHERE???
[13:30] herman Bergson: In Space???
[13:30] Gemma Cleanslate: well yes
[13:30] Qwark Allen: between two universes
[13:30] Gemma Cleanslate: where else
[13:30] herman Bergson: But then we get into an infinite regress...
[13:30] Qwark Allen: the colisions of two of them
[13:30] Bejiita Imako: i mean how can a explosion occur from nothing
[13:30] Gemma Cleanslate: i guess we have to read hawkings book
[13:30] herman Bergson: Exactly...
[13:30] Adriana Jinn: yes
[13:30] Qwark Allen: it was massive impact
[13:30] Bejiita Imako: what caused that explosion
[13:31] Gemma Cleanslate: that is what he will try to tell you
[13:31] Gemma Cleanslate: i think
[13:31] Gemma Cleanslate: not sure about the big bang theory
[13:31] Bruce Mowbray: Neuro-biologists like Andrew Newberg reduce "spiritual thought" to brain function. . . . Do they consider there might be a substrate to brain physiology?
[13:31] Gemma Cleanslate: is in there
[13:31] herman Bergson: They arent all happy with Hawkins stand Gemma...not at all...
[13:32] herman Bergson: it is just a theory..where he puts his money on...
[13:32] herman Bergson: Ok Back to Bruce and our focus of today..
[13:33] herman Bergson: Is brain acivity an other word for mind...?
[13:33] herman Bergson: We will dig into that question when we go into th emore philosophical discourses...
[13:33] herman Bergson: for now yes..
[13:34] Qwark Allen: there could be brain activity, and no mind on it
[13:34] herman Bergson: brain activity = the mind...
[13:34] Gemma Cleanslate: ah true
[13:34] Bejiita Imako: yes
[13:34] herman Bergson: no brain activity = no mind presnt
[13:34] Adriana Jinn: yes
[13:34] Qwark Allen: brain activity it`s a cinequanon for mind, but not allways
[13:35] herman Bergson: But this has serious consequences for religious ideas for instance..
[13:35] Bruce Mowbray: "no brain activity = no mind present" can neither be proved nor disproved.
[13:35] herman Bergson: sine qua non
[13:35] herman Bergson: yes
[13:36] Adriana Jinn: when you are in a coma what happens ?
[13:36] herman Bergson: Well Bruce...here we come in the philosophical battle field...
[13:37] Qwark Allen: depends on the cause, and on type of coma
[13:37] herman Bergson: For now I stay out of that debate and act as a pure materialist...
[13:37] herman Bergson: Well coma Adriana ..there are various kinds..
[13:37] herman Bergson: there is a brain condition where the person still is aware of his environment..
[13:38] herman Bergson: we dont knw exactly what the coma is..
[13:38] Adriana Jinn: but the mind is not present ?
[13:38] herman Bergson: yes the mind is present...
[13:38] Bejiita Imako: then you wouldn't be aware if your surroundings
[13:38] herman Bergson: there are cases of people recovering from a coma...
[13:38] Gemma Cleanslate: oh yesz
[13:38] Gemma Cleanslate: perfectly well
[13:38] herman Bergson: who had heard all discussions at the bed by doctors and others
[13:39] Qwark Allen: in the guineess, there are a person that recovered from the coma 50 years after
[13:39] Adriana Jinn: i would think that the brain is there but not the mind
[13:39] herman Bergson: the brain is a very complex machine...
[13:39] Gemma Cleanslate: i think the mind is there just impaired at the time
[13:39] Qwark Allen: got in come while was a child
[13:39] Adriana Jinn: yes sure
[13:39] Qwark Allen: coma*
[13:39] Gemma Cleanslate: unable to work through the brain
[13:39] Bruce Mowbray: Suppose I have a "reverence" for the Big Bang and the evolutionary process. . . . (I am a Pantheist.) --- Is that not also a "religious experience" even though there is nothing super-natural about it?
[13:39] Gemma Cleanslate: to the body
[13:39] Bruce Mowbray: reverence --- not reference. sorry.
[13:40] Gemma Cleanslate: that was one form of religion yes bruce
[13:40] herman Bergson: the mind is just the activity of braincells like movement of th eare is just acrivity of muscles
[13:40] herman Bergson: of the arm
[13:41] Bruce Mowbray: So, my neurons are firing like those of a Christian fundamentalist -- but the object of my "worship" is Nature. . .
[13:41] Gemma Cleanslate: oh my i hope not
[13:41] Gemma Cleanslate: the cf i mean
[13:41] herman Bergson: Well Bruce...as I mentioned in the lecture...it might depend on your genes..:-)
[13:41] Bruce Mowbray: It seems to me that reduction through neuro-biology is very similar to CF --
[13:42] Adriana Jinn: yes
[13:42] herman Bergson: To put it in an extreme way...
[13:42] Bruce Mowbray: We now pronounce brain chemistry, etc. as THE WAY IT IS.
[13:42] herman Bergson: your genes and brain determine whter you are a spiritual person or not
[13:42] Bruce Mowbray: That's a perfect example of what I am driving at.
[13:43] Gemma Cleanslate: well could be any fundalmentalist then not just christian ..... jewish .... muslim.....hindu......
[13:43] Qwark Allen: i think the socio-cultural surrouding there, have a big importance
[13:43] Gemma Cleanslate: not to mention all the others
[13:43] Bruce Mowbray: Pre-destination to Calvin is now "determinism" via brain physiology.
[13:43] herman Bergson: Well..there are two things...
[13:43] Gemma Cleanslate: :-)
[13:43] herman Bergson: not too fast here plz....
[13:44] herman Bergson: one thing..yes Bruce ..we have to face the debate on determinism...
[13:44] herman Bergson: and second....
[13:44] Bruce Mowbray wonders when neuro-plasticity will be mentioned.
[13:44] herman Bergson: tho the mind has an inclination to belief in supernatural things...
[13:45] herman Bergson: on the one hand it differs from person to person
[13:45] herman Bergson: and second..it differs form culture to culture where a person is born..
[13:45] herman Bergson: so the nature / nurture balance differs from situation to situation
[13:46] Bruce Mowbray: So. . . . it's either cultural determinism or neurological determinism....? Is individual choice to change one's brain also determined?
[13:46] herman Bergson: when I am an illiterate afgan is quite different forma European academic...in relation to the use of supersense
[13:47] Bruce Mowbray: If I chose to meditated -- and bring forth in my brain the results of meditation -- is that choice determined?
[13:47] herman Bergson: Bruce..I promise you...you get a whole series of lectures onthat for you especially ^_^
[13:47] Gemma Cleanslate: :-)
[13:48] Bruce Mowbray: fine -- but meanwhile I will operate on the assumption (and the experience) that I am free to bring forth changes in the functioning of my brain.
[13:48] herman Bergson: Because you hit the bulls eye yes...
[13:48] Gemma Cleanslate: let us know how that works
[13:48] Bruce Mowbray: neuro-plasticity.
[13:48] herman Bergson: smiles...
[13:49] Bejiita Imao: ㋡
[13:49] herman Bergson: neuro gymnastics
[13:49] Bruce Mowbray: changes in the physiology of the brain -- brought about by my personal choice.
[13:49] Gemma Cleanslate: ok
[13:49] Gemma Cleanslate: we all do that
[13:49] Qwark Allen: yep
[13:49] herman Bergson: Oh Bruce...
[13:49] Bejiita Imako: can be possible at least in part i think
[13:49] Qwark Allen: more or less
[13:49] Bruce Mowbray: A simple phrase: "What fires together, wires together...."
[13:49] herman Bergson: You really are walking on the wild side now...^_^
[13:50] Bruce Mowbray: Wild? Folks have been meditating for thousands of years....
[13:50] Gemma Cleanslate: it will be interesting
[13:50] herman Bergson: Great!!!!!
[13:50] Bruce Mowbray: in order to change their brain function.
[13:50] Bruce Mowbray: Now we see it through our instruments.
[13:50] Qwark Allen: just not, if you have a stroke, or any brain illness
[13:50] herman Bergson: You just point at what is ahead of us Bruce...!
[13:50] Bruce Mowbray: ok.
[13:50] Bruce Mowbray sits on hands.
[13:50] Qwark Allen: some are genetic
[13:50] herman Bergson: smiles
[13:50] herman Bergson: thnx Bruce lol
[13:50] Bruce Mowbray: ;-)
[13:50] Bejiita Imao: ㋡
[13:50] Qwark Allen: it`s your genes, that made possible you have that choice bruce
[13:51] herman Bergson: Well this is a terrific discussion...
[13:51] Gemma Cleanslate: very interesting
[13:51] herman Bergson: It shows what we still have to face...!
[13:51] Bejiita Imako: yes
[13:51] Bejiita Imako: really ㋡
[13:51] Qwark Allen: ;-)))
[13:51] Gemma Cleanslate: thursday more
[13:52] Adriana Jinn: for true
[13:52] Qwark Allen: Hooooooo!!!!!!! \O/ \O/ \O/
[13:52] Qwark Allen: | | |
[13:52] Qwark Allen: / \ / \ / \
[13:52] herman Bergson: For the time being I will stick to my materialist approach...
[13:52] Gemma Cleanslate: :-)
[13:52] herman Bergson: So thank you all..this was great ..thnx Bruce inparticualr
[13:52] Gemma Cleanslate: yw
[13:52] Gemma Cleanslate: ssee you all thursday
[13:52] Bejiita Imako: yay¨
[13:52] Qwark Allen: ¸¸.☆´ ¯¨☆.¸¸`☆** **☆´ ¸¸.☆¨¯`☆ H E R MA N ☆´ ¯¨☆.¸¸`☆** **☆´ ¸¸.☆¨¯`
[13:52] Qwark Allen: yw
[13:52] Bejiita Imako: YAY! (yay!)
[13:53] herman Bergson: We still have a long way to go...
[[13:53] Bruce Mowbray: Thank you everyone.
[13:53] Gemma Cleanslate: oh yes
[13:53] Bejiita Imako: awesome
[13:53] herman Bergson: Thank you all
[13:53] Gemma Cleanslate: yw
[13:53] Gemma Cleanslate: Bye, Bye ㋡
[13:53] herman Bergson: Class dismissed
[13:53] bergfrau Apfelbaum: ty herman!! ty class :-))
[13:53] Adriana Jinn: thank you herman and thanks all

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 words..you 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 brain....how 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