Nice find Archy, nice diversity of subjects at your link.
Here is another interesting one
http://thevenusproject.com/en/the-venus-project-introduction/aims-proposals
Also haven't checked too deep, just a random find but they don't seem to
say much..
On 6/10/2011 3:49 PM, paradox wrote:
Looks interesting; thanks!
On Jun 9, 10:43 pm, archytas<[email protected]> wrote:
I did find this site -http://www.humansfuture.org/- but haven't
explored it much yet.
On Jun 9, 5:51 pm, paradox<[email protected]> wrote:
Perhaps pairing up is not the miracle, rigsy03; biology doing its
thing. Perhaps staying paired is the real miracle.
On Jun 8, 3:30 pm, rigsy03<[email protected]> wrote:
No- I am a beautiful elder female. :-) However, you may be used to a
different mindset regarding interests and ideas from your experiences
with females so I understand your confusion about my gender though I
do think it is a miracle that males and females have managed to pair
up at all sometimes. We really are quite different. I am also
different from many females I have known in my lifetime and I suppose
that is traced to my family and a different kind of childhood from my
peers among other influences. For the most part, I grouped with middle
class and beyond liberal-progressive-Democrats but found them
insincere and I can't abide insincerity.:-)
In regards to manipulation by culture/ads and the advantage of
education and it continuation in adult life, I would say it allows us
to see through the obvious exaggeration, lack of logic and attempt to
create an artificial want/need/desire. In fact, the exercise is pretty
humorous but I do admit to having a few shopaholic moments in my own
life so I have also been gullible.
On Jun 7, 10:15 pm, Chuck Bowling<[email protected]>
wrote:
Hummm... For some reason I had the impression you were male.
At any rate, I don't think education or economic status has much to do with
our susceptibility. We can all be manipulated into believing things that
aren't necessarily true. Take the social prerogative to stay one up on the
next door neighbors. Millions are spent on commercial campaigns that try and
convince us that we should have a bigger TV, newer car, or better
furniture.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:46 PM, rigsy03<[email protected]> wrote:
Yes- history is a violent version of Musical Chairs.
General populations with poor educations/economies believe anything in
order to thrive/survive.
I am female so we obviously have different sins on our souls.
On Jun 6, 10:06 am, Chuck Bowling<[email protected]>
wrote:
Germany and Spain as well as every other country and culture has it's own
version of normal. Our view of the norms in Nazi Germany are that it's
repugnant. But, Nazi propaganda convinced a significant minority that
Jews
were abnormal. The general population accepted the propaganda as the norm
irregardless of their individual beliefs and it became the norm.
We are all liars and we are all thieves. Can you honestly say that you've
never stolen an extra bite of mac& cheese off someone's plate or told
your
wife that you didn't mind her stockings hanging in the shower?
- It's the norm.
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 5:56 AM, rigsy03<[email protected]> wrote:
Fitting into what??? Nazi Germany? The Spanish Inqusition??? What if
"normal" is psychotic? Or shallow? (What happened to your
Objectivism?) Our "own experience" is not unique- it is a way of
identifying with moral stuggles in a universal sense. Societies may
become dazzled with their innovations but human character really
hasn't changed much over the centuries- a liar is still a liar- a
thief is still a thief, etc.
On Jun 5, 9:46 pm, Chuck Bowling<[email protected]>
wrote:
I believe that social norms are simply a metric for fitting into a
society.
The closer one is to achieving the 'norm' within that particular
society
the
more integrated and accepted he is in that society. Being 'normal' is
a
subjective quality that only applies in the society where it is
defined.
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 12:59 AM, rigsy03<[email protected]> wrote:
Actually, the greatest teacher is still our own experiences unless
life is vicarious. Education can expand our options. It takes some
time to shake off family or tribal/clan behaviors. Ethics responds
to
real time/historical eras- what is a good life?- how ought we
behave?-
so that branch of philosophy remains active. I don't think that
what a
society accepts as norms should be so readily accepted as a guide
but
should be examined and tested.
On Jun 3, 11:05 am, Chuck Bowling<[email protected]
wrote:
If by education you mean learning from the experiences of others
then
by
definition that would be a social behavior.
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 7:56 AM, rigsy03<[email protected]>
wrote:
I disagree- our behavior options have changed- radically. We
change
more from education than our enviornment as long as learning is
a
life-
long affair.
On Jun 1, 10:09 pm, Chuck Bowling<
[email protected]
wrote:
I think that if you're going to talk about human behavior you
should
differentiate between social and individual behavior. I don't
think
that
the
behavior of humans as individuals has changed much since we
climbed
out
of
the trees. As social animals I think we are constantly
evolving
and
adapting
to our environments.
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 8:33 AM, rigsy03<[email protected]>
wrote:
Maybe we should reduce the time frame to 3 or 4 thousand
years.
I dragged you into my midnight thoughts and remembered a
film-
Japanese- "Roshoman" which I saw later than its release
time of
1950
which got into this "what is reality" business and made
somewhat of
an
impact on my thinking along with "point of view". I suppose
this
might
lead off into empathy but it still would not solve the
definition
of
"What Is Reality?".
Will post another topic that is related to "human nature"-
"human
rights".
On May 31, 6:00 pm, Chuck Bowling<
[email protected]
wrote:
To be honest, I'm not even sure what 'human nature'
means.
As to reality, I think that we all struggle to try and
understand
it.
Scientists want to define it with logic and theologians
want
to
define it
with religious belief.
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 4:03 PM, rigsy03<
[email protected]>
wrote:
Do you think human nature will change- ever? Then it
really
doesn't
matter about reality.
On May 29, 7:36 pm, Chuck Bowling<
[email protected]
wrote:
Nanotech is just the implementation of another layer
of
our
understanding
of
the universe. I think we still have a long ways to go
before
we
actually
have a firm grasp on the true nature of reality.
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Menfranco Laws<
[email protected]
wrote:
Hi everybody!
Well said Ash, where is Pat indeed when we need him
to
say
God's
things, because for me when you are talking about
nanotech
makes me
thing about God and ask myself this question; Is
this
nanotech
the
link between us and God? Perhaps once we have
learned
enough
about
this nanotech we be able to understand how God
works?
Who
knows? it
is
just a thought.
On May 24, 9:48 am, Ash<[email protected]>
wrote:
Where's Pat when we need him?
On 5/23/2011 8:08 AM,
...
read more ยป- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
