Merle,
Please “Shamelessly Promote” your workshop. I want to know more. Does it have a website? Nick Nicholas S. Thompson Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University <http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ From: Friam [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Merle Lefkoff Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2014 8:54 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] "rational" John, If you were attending the Zen Brain workshop at Upaya in Santa Fe (where I teach applied complexity in the Buddhlst Chaplaincy program)--along with some of the most famous neuroscientists in the world and Neil Theise, a remarkable complexity guy--you might find the answer to your question. The workshop starts the end of January. Merle On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 6:17 AM, John Kennison <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: I consider myself a rational person because I believe what I observe and I believe in what is observed by any group of people I trust (such as a near consensus of scientists). I further believe in whatever follows logically. I believe I can predict the likely consequences of my actions and this helps make me a reasonably happy person. Belief in God or belief in the inerrancy of the bible do not pass my tests. But there is scientific evidence that religious people are healthier and happier than non-religious people. This seems to be so even though people who would apparently be neither healthy nor happy are almost always religious. So what should I make of this? ________________________________________ From: Friam [[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> ] on behalf of glen [[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> ] Sent: Friday, January 03, 2014 7:42 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] "rational" On 01/03/2014 03:47 PM, Marcus G. Daniels wrote: > Or the `successful' may just be apex predators, but still just one of > many possible species of person. They feed on the productivity of these > other species. Perhaps not wanting to be one of them, the drug addict > (unconsciously) denies the predator that productivity... As Arnade > observes, everyone makes mistakes, so perhaps we can just enumerate the > wolves and note that's what wolves do but that they get no further honor. Well, it seems to me that the ascription of honor (or any other honorific) is a dynamic thing. Not only is society fickle like that, but it's also difficult to predict what your arbitrary weirdo might take _pride_ in. Witness: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/man-dies-eating-roaches-587314 or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armin_Meiwes So, we can't prescribe what honor the wolves get. In fact, merely counting them might encourage more people to want to be them. I think the answer lies in creating/facilitating wolf-eating species. -- ⇒⇐ glen ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com -- Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D. President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> mobile: (303) 859-5609 skype: merlelefkoff
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
