"I have found that life persists in the midst of destruction and, therefore, there must be a higher law than that of destruction. Only under that law would a well-ordered society be intelligible and life worth living. And if that is the law of life, we have to work it out in daily life. Wherever there are jars, wherever you are confronted with an opponent, conquer him with love. In this crude manner, I have worked it out in my life. That does not mean that all my difficulties are solved. Only, I have found that this law of love has answered as the law of destruction has never done."
—Mahatma Gandhi, YI, 1-10-1931, p.286 — Existential Hope
what was the pre-"1958" "purpose of education" — 180 Proof
so what was the pre-"1958" "purpose of education" — 180 Proof
vis-à-vis state-sanctioned racial terrorism / legal segregation, systemic discrimination against women & gays, widespread unfair & unsafe labor practices, endemic populist antisemitism, wholesale environmental degregation by agriculture & heavy industry, and ongoing land (and mineral rights) theft from and 'public erasure' of Indigenous Americans ... — 180 Proof
My insurmountable hurdle was this one:
The closer a system gets to the 4 omnis, the more moral it would become.
— universeness
What does 'moral' mean in this context? By what standards? For what reason? What would impel it?
Especially when bolstered by this:
Does 'with great power comes great responsibility,' not ring true for you?
— universeness
Not as it has applied to human agents through history. Certainly not to human sentiments regarding insects. Why would it apply to a non-human? — Vera Mont
↪Vera Mont
Humiliation does not cure hatred.
— Vera Mont
I think that Mahatma Gandhi's primary aim was to generate understanding. Both communities then, and even now, often misunderstood the other and believed as if the other side was filled with evil people who were hell-bent on destroying them. Breaking this perspectis a major step towards national unity. To a great extent, he managed to succeed in his aim. Even during the height of the Pakistan movement (and the communalism of the Hindu Mahasabha), leaders such as Maulana Azad and Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan stood by Mahatma Gandhi and the idea of a united India. — Existential Hope
This can be done successfully, I believe, though any person is capable of making mistakes (and learning from them hopefully). — 0 thru 9
I love this statement too! :heart: Have you spent time with a severely retarded person who is amazing at seeing life as it is and making good choices? You and I have heads full of stories and most of the time our heads automatically give us feedback based on our stories, not so much the facts at the moment. For example, I attempted to leave a gated nursing home with my friend and as soon as I saw the locking mechanism, I knew we had to go back inside to get the code (my technological story of how things work). My friend stuck his hand through the gate and opened it from the outside. He was a great help to me when my life was turned upside down and my middle-class mentality was not enough to keepFacts are facts, and facts should certainly be recognized for optimal existence. — 0 thru 9
In the experience of being a human, with perceptions, sensations, ideas, and feelings swirling around our minds, and activity churning nonstop around us, using internal stories makes the world clearer to us. — 0 thru 9
As an example, if a person chooses to perhaps weave into their stories zombies, unicorns, Batman, gnomes, angels, demons, ET aliens, UFOs, multi-dimensions, talking animals or ancestor spirits… and can live a stable existence, who’s to say otherwise? — 0 thru 9
But is claiming to be completely 100% story-free itself a story we can tell ourselves?
Is it helpful or not? — 0 thru 9
Wow is that an exciting question when mixed with universeness's understanding of AI. AI can create music but can it stop a war? Or would AI even attempt to create music without a human programming it to do so? With AI I think we are going through a major consciousness change and it could be fun to come back in 200 years to see how humans doing things in the future. What stories will they tell that explain their nations? Our young today do not have a lot of interest in dead men and what used to be.:lol: They can't even think about what happened a few years ago has to do with what is happening today. They know themselves and their lives but not much more.Is this continuous story creation an advanced creative power we have? — 0 thru 9
The golden rule can also be a secular humanist rule, no need for theistic support, imo but I am glad that some religions do try to employ it. It's certainly true that many religious individuals, have made great sacrifices to help other people, but I personally think that such is demonstrated by non-religious folks as much as it is by religious folks. — universeness
‘Pick a side, and fight like hell against the evil enemies’ seems to be the common ‘meme’.
Which leads to dehumanizing everyone and falling prey to propaganda, conformism, and mind control. — 0 thru 9
There is nothing but horror on both sides of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. I know there are many contentions that feed the conflict, but the religious one is amongst the worse imo.
When I hear the individual stories of what savagery is meeted out, to individual victims, I again can only find a little solace in silent incredulity. I am a white man, living in a (by comparison with Gaza or Israel) safe Scotland, financially ok, and no major troubles in my life. I just have no experience of facing such levels of horror in my life. — universeness
In some cases I would use 'to err is human,' in other cases my responses, actions, decisions have never become acceptable to me. I would respond differently if I had the chance again. 'We learn from our mistakes,' can be a very bitter pill, even though it's true. — universeness
I have always found you to be more open and not restricted to 'my own experience, observation and understanding of human behaviour.' I hope I am too. I don't like the term 'versions of truth'. I accept different observers can report different emphasis or aspects of truths, about what they observed from their reference frame, but those are part of the same truth imo, only the different frames of reference, create the badly termed 'versions,' of the same underlying truth.
It's the never observed from any reference frame, 'versions of truth' (lies), that folks such as maga evanhellicals and other such fanatics, peddle, that bother me most. I think the word fanatic should be applied more accurately. — universeness
Yep, The good the bad and the ugly, all claim to be working in accordance with the will of their chosen god or gods. :roll: From good folks like Gandhi, and Martin Luther King, to bad influencers like shamen, witch doctors, druids, popes, priests, imams and rabbis. all the way to ugly horrors like Hitler and Jack the ripper. — universeness
The problem isn’t someone’s particular spiritual or religious belief so much as the psychological stability of the person, and their empathy and the ability to see outside of their own ‘bubble’ (as the link you provided refers to). — 0 thru 9
If we take a character like Alexander the butcher. He, it seems, wanted to 'conquer the world' and impose the Macedonian/Greek notion of what civilisation was and create a human world that lived the way dictated by Alex and his cronies. Of course, the entire world as we know it today was not accessible for Alex and his mob. — universeness
I think that our culture (being a culture, as well as being a civilization, as well as being/becoming a global civilization) shares with smaller societies the drive to spread its ideas and memes among its members, and even to spread its beliefs beyond its borders.
This informational imprinting on a child starts right after birth.
As noted above, the ever-present and ever-growing media presence is a powerful teacher, perhaps equal to (or surpassing) parental and family ‘teaching’. — 0 thru 9
That really depends on so many factors. There are many bad teachers, impatient teachers, 'moody' teachers, authoritarian nutjobs, slightly psychotic teachers. — universeness
True democratic socialism has never been successfully implemented as a national governance, anywhere today or in history. Many attempts have been made but none have been successful so far.
To nurture people and not profit.
To prioritise cooperation and not competition.
To act as the political equivalent of secular humanism.
To control the means of production, distribution and exchange, for the benefit of all and not just elites.
To govern by the democratically obtained consent of all stakeholders, and to continuously consult the population you represent at all levels.
To govern openly and accept all established checks and balances. — universeness
What does 'be social' towards other people, mean to you?
What follows is a description of a possible intersection of our Culture and the Individual, especially when looking for a ‘monkey wrench’ so to speak (that gut feeling that something in our way of life is somewhat out of order).
(At least, this is how I see it… that is, an extremely simplified overview lol). — 0 thru 9
I love that argument!Our minds are among the most powerful things in the known universe. — 0 thru 9
Turn absolutely all the Earth into humans. This land is our land, for it belongs to us.
Who else is going to claim it? Squirrels? Giraffes? Honeybees? — 0 thru 9
But the pleasurable surge of power that was the reward for total domination didn’t need a college education to be experienced and enjoyed. — 0 thru 9
So our Civilization imprints each of its members with the ‘gameplan’ or the ‘program’. — 0 thru 9
Studies have demonstrated that a person will resist only so long doing something they consider wrong or useless, when given negative feedback like pain or disapproval.
We are not machines after all, though sometimes we desperately try to be. — 0 thru 9
But most likely, the foundational message will be remarkably similar: “go along with the civilizational program, and you will be rewarded!” — 0 thru 9
Notice how you defer to religious authority. That's being religious. That's not being spiritual. — praxis
What you are saying here appears to be close to democratic socialism perhaps?
Which is quite fine in my book. Just wanted to get your feedback on that.
Now for a country like the USA to get a TRUE democracy joined with a TRUE socialism is the difficult part.
It’s difficult because the Elite (rhymes with excrete) the 1% and their servants and wannabes are pulling with all their mighty might in the opposite direction. — 0 thru 9
I have spent my career in Computing science and AI can be a fantastic assist to humanity, in all the problems they face, on a day to day basis, both individually and as a community.
In my experience, 'expert systems,' have helped our children's education, advance, more than (or at least as much as) direct interaction with people/teachers/school systems.
Absolutely yes, yes, yes! Athena, AI can be used to spread fake news and AI can be used to deceive and manipulate. But please remember, that is only currently done via nefarious humans, not nefarious mecha. I don't know if a future AGI/ASI would become anti-biological life, such as anti-human life. That has been a long time discussion on TPF and is currently a main discussion happening on-line and in the global media today. So far, the only evidence I have encountered that suggests projected mecha might turn against us, is in sci-fi productions.
The warnings recently stated by those in the field of AI, regarding projected AI advances, seem to me, to be currently concerned more about how some nefarious humans might manipulate AI advances, rather than how AI might become independently malevolent towards us. Do You agree? — universeness
You do what you can Athena, as will I. I would rather be too busy, than be too bored.
My work in education burnt me out but since my early retirement, I now have quite a pleasant, 'fight for what I think is right' / chill out, have some whisky, beer and good cheers, paint, write, play computer games, etc, balance. Getting the balance to a stage that suits you, is what is needed. You cant help others, if you are 'messed up' yourself. — universeness
I think the answer lies somewhere between more help for those on the front line, from AI based expert systems and the establishment of more robust grievance procedures when you don't agree with the actions or decisions of your line managers. I think this would apply to all service based employment. — universeness
That is not necessarily the case. This was a run-down, trouble-prone housing project near the hospital where I worked. It got better since that time. There are many community gardens in big cities in the US, too. As gardening brings people together, so can an industry or reclamation project.
Any neighbourhood can become a community; given the resources and freedom, any well-functioning neighbourhood can become a self-governed political unit. One of the key factors to involve everyone, down to the toddler old enough to remember which weed to pull and big enough to carry a thermos, in the planning and in the work, to the extent of their capability, as well the benefits. Not to do things for other people, but with other people. — Vera Mont
God is both logos and pathos, or rather, order and chaos then? When you have time. — praxis
Logos appeals to the audience's reason, building up logical arguments. Ethos appeals to the speaker's status or authority, making the audience more likely to trust them. Pathos appeals to the emotions, trying to make the audience feel angry or sympathetic, for example.
What are logos, ethos, and pathos? - Scribbr
In the Vedic tradition, the ancient root of yogic philosophy, the concept of God or Supreme Reality is understood in a three-fold manner. The triple function of God, Trimurti in Sanskrit, is expressed as Brahma the creator, Vishnu the sustainer and Shiva the destroyer. Each energy has a specific task. Let us examine them. https://www.theyogasanctuary.biz/the-vedic-trinity-create-sustain-destroy/
100%. The entirety of what you have said here is important.
If the stories of the US forefathers are true, they lived exceptionally vivid and important lives. If the stories are true, they were masters and practitioners of a sacred science.
If the stories about the US founding fathers (and mothers) are true, then I have only caught fleeting glimpses, despite my best efforts, of what they knew to be true. If the stories are true, those individuals are true Saints.
Truly Blessed, those people and us; regardless. I still hope the stories are true. I truly do. — Bret Bernhoft
Freemasonry is a worldwide organization with a long and complex history. Its members have included politicians, engineers, scientists, writers, inventors and philosophers. Many of these members have played prominent roles in world events, such as revolutions, wars and intellectual movements. — Callum McKelvie, Tom Garlinghouse
:up: Thanks for your reply! :smile:
I was going to respond by saying something like “this (situation you described) is completely unacceptable in an affluent First-World country… ”.
But that sounds a bit hollow and callous to my ears for some reason…
Would it be acceptable anywhere? Why?
Our Mother Culture’s* answer: “It is difficult to accept, and so very tragic [wipes away a tear].
But we must face Reality, and see how the sausage gets made. However, such suffering is inevitable for those on the primative low rung. Only the strong can stomach the harsh reality.
(We didn’t make the rules! Darwin did). But wait! There is an upside! If only those (natural but backward) people join us in our technological journey to the heavens, then they too will get a delicious piece of the pie!” (A tiny piece, mostly crust lol).
But what are the consequences of following such thinking?
(For it is meant to be followed, and definitely not just theoretical).
Unfortunately, I’m still trying to rinse my brain clear of the persistence of our cultural propaganda, an indoctrination that’s even deeper than party politics. (Deeper because it is uncontested by both parties, and even by most of the ‘fringe’).
There’s an ignorant (and thus quite insistent and loud) though unwanted voice that lingers in my mind, which tells me that those people in distant lands living in makeshift huts are actually just squatters on the property of Civilization.
Not unlike the squirrels living in an apple orchard: tolerated as long as they don’t get in the way of progress.
Then I realize that I may not agree with every persistent thought that pops up in my head.
I think I have more brain rinsing to do, to hopefully get rid of the brainwashing…
(it’s a work in progress).
* ‘Mother Culture’ being a term I find useful, one used by Daniel Quinn to personify the cultural indoctrination that lives in our unconscious and carries immense influence. — 0 thru 9
I am an example of such a teacher, who took early retirement at 55, because I was burnt out because of the education system in Scotland. — universeness
In recognition of the possibility, that it was mostly my mind jumps, rather than the contributions of Vera Mont or @Athena that caused what you considered a thread worthy of maintaining its position as a mainline thread, getting sent to the lounge, where other TPF members have opined, is the place threads go to die. Which at least, has been shown, is not always true.
Perhaps my 'sorry' was more of a recognition of a possibility that 'influenced' @Jamal's action, rather than an aspect of my thought processes that I sometimes regret. I consider my 'butterfly mind,' a great asset in the main. — universeness
I appreciate the love. That was a nice surprise. — Bret Bernhoft
Nature is infinitely more cruel than any human could be. :smirk: — praxis
You're quite wrong about this. Most scientific and technical innovations prior to the scientific revolution were achieved by societies organized by religious traditions. Ancient pagan, Islamic, and Christian scholars pioneered individual elements of the scientific method. Historically, Christianity has been and still is a patron of sciences.
Religions deliberately use heratics (e.g., "the Bible says there will be people who reject God and they are evil") to shore up group identity by defining what they are not. It is a very effective tactic and that's why it is so widely used. Indeed, it's such an effective tactic that no one can get off it.
I have no idea of what you're talking about here.
I suggest that you seriously consider what the actual purpose of religion is and why it exists. Also, consider if there's a difference between spirituality and religion.
I think if Orwell could have imagined an artificial general intelligence in 1949 his book 1984 would have been a bit different. Can you imagine the power of media manipulation and surveillance it could have? We appear to be rapidly approaching AGI and those who develop it, the excessively wealthy, will be in control. — praxis
This is a crucial question.
And because it seems difficult to not think it sounds like a naïve question or adopt a jaded, cynical, or pessimistic attitude towards it, may illustrate how low our expectations have slid.
A culture that can’t cover such a basic need is in trouble. (Probably not breaking news to anyone… ) — 0 thru 9
I pointed out that a religion is not "as we make it". It's highly dogmatic by nature, in other words, and when revisions are made it's by religious leaders. Followers are not free to make up their own beliefs and promote them within a religion. That would be considered heretical. — praxis
I'm aware of various of conceptions of God, some very unlike the one depicted in the Bible. I see no reason why an atheist would be unable to consider an inhuman God. Indeed, the God depicted in the Bible strikes me as extremely inhuman.
Abrahamic religions most certainly do not have a concept that would lead to scientific thinking. they do not have a concept of a Prime Mover or logos. Their brains have zero thought patterns for thinking in such terms. I am not sure that is true of Hinduism or Buddhism. Buddhism can be very different from place to place. Some regions are more superstitious than others. And of course, some understanding of Hinduism is very superstitious and the highest level of thinking is patterned for logic and abstract thinking and therefore philosophical, the Siamese twin of science.Also, religions don't all agree on logos and the prime mover. There is no prime mover in Buddhism, for instance, and they'd consider the dualism inherent in logos an expression of ignorance.
It doesn't make any sense to me why an atheist would be unable to discuss the notion of god as a force of nature with no human qualities. BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, I was responding to your claim about a religion. Of course, individuals can have their own spiritual experiences and beliefs.
No, that would be a Theocracy.
That is not true of a democracy because the damn God is the prime mover, logos, the laws of nature. Excuse my pagan emotive language but there we go with the merry-go-round. Who gets to define God? You just threw the prime mover and logos out the window and destroyed the reasoning of democracy. Can we discover the laws of the universe and base our laws on such knowledge? Isn't that fundamental to democracy?Theocracy-- a system of government in which priests rule in the name of God or a god.
"his ambition is to lead a worldwide theocracy"
Moral, is a matter of cause and effect. When the consequences are good it is moral. If the consequences are bad it is immoral.
— Athena
How would this understanding apply to something like abortion? I think that for any normal person abortion 'feels' wrong, so one consequence of it is a bad feeling. That indicates that it's immoral, according to the cause & effect view. On the other hand, studies indicate that legalizing abortion reduces crime/poverty, a good consequence.
Things become less clear when it comes to personal rights, authority, and tradition. The values that shape our personal and social identities often disagree on the consequences of abortion. — praxis
In the case of ancient Athens, abortion was not forbidden by law. However, this right was not directed at the woman and her sovereignty over her body but at the rights of the father of the child she was carrying (Flacelière, 1971).May 19, 2023
Ancient Athenian Women and the issue of abortion
https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/archaeology-classics-and-egyptology/blog/2023/ancient-athenian-women-abortion/#:~:text=In%20the%20case%20of%20ancient,carrying%20(Flaceli%C3%A8re%2C%201971).
