unapologetic

Autumn wrote:
Perhaps for some it alleviates stress or might reduce anxiety, however. I guess that’s a plus if it happens. But then it can also increase stress situationally.

I’ve read that having someone we love nearby reduces our own pain.
So maybe prayer reduces pain.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6689415/

If you look at f…[Read more]

Autumn wrote:
“In reality, religion and science do overlap.”

I can think of one way in which they overlap.  The healing power of the human body.  This is like God’s unconditional love, “the rain that falls on the just and the unjust”.

Of course, religion being the contradictory thing it is, we all know that God only loves Christians and not a…[Read more]

Unseen wrote:
Mendel’s study of genetics wasn’t racist in execution or result. It was what happened to the data afterward that became the problem.

Maybe what happened to the data afterwards is a subject worthy of study in itself.

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
There is a gene called MAOA (aka the warrior gene) that is an indicator of psychopathy.

A definition of psychopaths as intrinsically violent, sadistic etc. is contentious and almost certainly inaccurate.  I think this kind of person is more likely a cluster B personality like narcissistic or anti-social or…[Read more]

I think intelligence runs in families, as do a lot of things.  But the distribution of traits is pretty much random between families, and somewhat random within families.

There would have to be selection pressure for intelligence, i.e., intelligent people would be more likely to reproduce.  That seems unlikely except possibly in the case of the Ashkenazi jews.

Unseen wrote:
Here’s a topic that a little research could finally determine: On the whole, is intelligence linked to skin color? In other words, viewing the overall greater success of the white world, might it be explained via skin color?

Anybody who has the courage to do it would be free to knock themselves out.  If handled by non-racists, I’…[Read more]

I think it’s fine to compare two social groups according to some standard. In studying morality, people do it all the time.

I think we need to study anything and everything.  Reality is a complete picture whose parts all fit together logically.  One part may inform another more distant part.

A problem with ideological extremists is that they often seem to want to change facts to fit their ideology.  I can’t think of a “woke” example, but a feminist has said to me th…[Read more]

Thank you for your explanation Autumn. I admit I still don’t quite get it, but I’ll keep trying.

It raises the issue of how relational we human beings are in many ways.  I.e., in identity (I exist in the minds of others), in reasoning (I need to explain to others), self-esteem (depends partly on others’ opinions or treatment), and morality…[Read more]

OK, so I can observe your neural activity while you experience consciousness, but so what? That’s what we do already. You don’t need to be related to through observation in order to be conscious, except by your own brain.

I think the consciousness article makes sense, in that consciousness is subjectively felt and objectively measured. The subjective experience is a process of being measured by one’s own brain. Beyond that, I’m not sure what the implications are.

Autumn wrote:
But I don’t know that our brains are wired to put rationality first. So we can use the illusion of rationality to entrench incorrect information in ways we other wise might not have been able to do.

There’s the famous example of brown beetles which try and have sex with discarded brown beer bottles, because they look like brown b…[Read more]

PopeBeanie wrote:
What did early humans think were “facts”, before they had sophisticated language and communications?

You’re talking about before the dawn of the scientific method.  So probably, “facts” were a mixture of observation, report, and speculation.

Speaking of “personal identities”, I think they must have been even more significa…

[Read more]