https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Religions_timeline.svg&oldid=155208608
Religions have been upgraded from the beginning of time, each time by the men living at that time. Even if there was a god, men wrote the stuff. This is evolution. God is a concept, and as a concept it exists in the heads of believers, but there still is no physical god. It may teach a moral code, but those are easy to separate from the religion.
When we look at the middle east today, it is obvious that religion must be eliminated if there is ever going to be peace. Treat others as you would like to be treated, and go from there.
But what do I know?
Wednesday, December 30, 2015
Tuesday, December 29, 2015
Religious are .... pick a word.
http://www.reuters.com/article/usa-islamic-state-sexslaves-idUSKBN0UC0DZ20151229
It has become obvious to me that religions have evolved from a attempt at establishing a consistent moral and education from beyond the grave system into a system for expansion of territory, of control of people, and destruction of those who will not submit to being controlled.
Those savages remind me of Genghis Khan:
Happiness lies in conquering one’s enemies,
in driving them in front of oneself,
in taking their property,
in savoring their despair,
in outraging their wives and daughters.
Genghis Khan
All religions have evolved form the primitive folk religions. These all are man made. These have been built, by con-men and others to educate from beyond the grave. Some are well inattention-ed, but the ground crew has mutated the intent for there own use. Some people long for direction, and that longing combined with their own imagination creates the directed spirit. Religions are man made. That realization explains a great deal.
http://news.yahoo.com/chicago-officer-shot-black-teen-plead-not-guilty-135303662.html
In the brave new world, the police will have the right to stop anyone with the slimiest of reasons, even a feeling, and question anyone. Failure to stop and answer, show I.D. and answer the questions will give the police the right to shoot me. I fear it is coming, life in a police state. Perhaps we will require a chip installed, so a wand swipe will provide a sufficient information. It will not impede the cooperative people, just the non-cooperative. I fear it is coming.
The police cannot let someone walk away with a weapon in there hands, or that have committed a offense. It is that simple. Stop or be shot.
The ignorant will cling to religion, the educated will accept a chip, and away we go. The penal colonies will be set up as fenced slums or the like.
But what do I know?
It has become obvious to me that religions have evolved from a attempt at establishing a consistent moral and education from beyond the grave system into a system for expansion of territory, of control of people, and destruction of those who will not submit to being controlled.
Those savages remind me of Genghis Khan:
Happiness lies in conquering one’s enemies,
in driving them in front of oneself,
in taking their property,
in savoring their despair,
in outraging their wives and daughters.
Genghis Khan
All religions have evolved form the primitive folk religions. These all are man made. These have been built, by con-men and others to educate from beyond the grave. Some are well inattention-ed, but the ground crew has mutated the intent for there own use. Some people long for direction, and that longing combined with their own imagination creates the directed spirit. Religions are man made. That realization explains a great deal.
http://news.yahoo.com/chicago-officer-shot-black-teen-plead-not-guilty-135303662.html
In the brave new world, the police will have the right to stop anyone with the slimiest of reasons, even a feeling, and question anyone. Failure to stop and answer, show I.D. and answer the questions will give the police the right to shoot me. I fear it is coming, life in a police state. Perhaps we will require a chip installed, so a wand swipe will provide a sufficient information. It will not impede the cooperative people, just the non-cooperative. I fear it is coming.
The police cannot let someone walk away with a weapon in there hands, or that have committed a offense. It is that simple. Stop or be shot.
The ignorant will cling to religion, the educated will accept a chip, and away we go. The penal colonies will be set up as fenced slums or the like.
But what do I know?
Monday, December 28, 2015
What Now?
What is the name of that what now lost feeling?
That feeling on completion of a phase of life, or some all consuming issue, when the next step or action is not apparent?
It is not indecision but similar. For the feeling to be indecision,we would need alternatives beyond the ever present do nothing alternative.
I suffered from that during writing of some engineering forensic reports. Typical case would be a house that had undergone settlements due to drying and shrinking of foundation soils. The City does some utility repair work and a bit of vibration occurs, perhaps the cracks extend or some new cracks show up. The home owner suits the city for all the damages including settlements. So how does one separate the damage or the cost of repair? Without the house being leveled, repair is a waste, while the cost of settlement repair is the owners own liability. Anyway, that what now feeling?
Similar feeling arises often when I do not want to do something that is obviously the next step, but I do not want to do it. It can be handled as grouping this as a "stress", but that does not point to a solution. It is the most uncomfortable feeling.
As a retired person, who did not want to do the available work any more, dealing with that stress has become necessary. Normally for such a decision, the decision method is to generate some alternatives, evaluate the alternatives as best one can, set up some criteria and the decision may be obvious. The issue that I have is generating any alternative that I am remotely able or interested in looking at. I just do not want to do it. It is that simple.
In one of the videos I watched this weekend, that feeling was mentioned as being one of the worst feelings which I agree, yet I cannot put a word to it. Just do it does not help.
I miss the social benefits of OA "after meeting meetings" but not the useless meetings. It was those that helped much more than anything else. I have tried to describe what those gathering provided previously.
But what do I know?
That feeling on completion of a phase of life, or some all consuming issue, when the next step or action is not apparent?
It is not indecision but similar. For the feeling to be indecision,we would need alternatives beyond the ever present do nothing alternative.
I suffered from that during writing of some engineering forensic reports. Typical case would be a house that had undergone settlements due to drying and shrinking of foundation soils. The City does some utility repair work and a bit of vibration occurs, perhaps the cracks extend or some new cracks show up. The home owner suits the city for all the damages including settlements. So how does one separate the damage or the cost of repair? Without the house being leveled, repair is a waste, while the cost of settlement repair is the owners own liability. Anyway, that what now feeling?
Similar feeling arises often when I do not want to do something that is obviously the next step, but I do not want to do it. It can be handled as grouping this as a "stress", but that does not point to a solution. It is the most uncomfortable feeling.
As a retired person, who did not want to do the available work any more, dealing with that stress has become necessary. Normally for such a decision, the decision method is to generate some alternatives, evaluate the alternatives as best one can, set up some criteria and the decision may be obvious. The issue that I have is generating any alternative that I am remotely able or interested in looking at. I just do not want to do it. It is that simple.
In one of the videos I watched this weekend, that feeling was mentioned as being one of the worst feelings which I agree, yet I cannot put a word to it. Just do it does not help.
I miss the social benefits of OA "after meeting meetings" but not the useless meetings. It was those that helped much more than anything else. I have tried to describe what those gathering provided previously.
But what do I know?
Sunday, December 27, 2015
Thursday, December 17, 2015
Self reprograming (5) purpose
Self reprogramming must occur on three levels, philosophical aka thinking, emotional and behavioral. Philosophical is where the most benefit can be had, for to some extent, it controls the other two levels, according to some. But then there is habit, an automatic response to a situation. We do it unthinkingly, like dishing out the amount of food we take. We need to understand our motivation, our beliefs, values, what has meaning, and produces engagement in us, and what the end outcomes look like.
Ultimately, the purpose of reprogramming is to stimulate a sufficient change to bring about a immediate and complete end to this overeating problem. So if a modern philosopher wrote the 12 steps, what would step one look like? Using Socratic sort of questioning as a method, I suggest the that would look something like: We recognized that we have a problem with our weight which is brought about by eating to much in general. Carbohydrates are the worst, while fats and excess proteins contribute. The overeating has causes, to be explored later. The overeating and obesity has wreaked havoc in our lives and now needs to addressed.
Step 2 would be something like: We realize that the solution to this problem can be help explore the causes, potential solutions and management strategies to overcome the problem. Step 3 will need to lay out the trichotomy, try the program, or not, or explore the program further before making a decision. What the program consists of is yet to be explored.
In the short term the program requires three small meals each day and a full schedule of activities between meals. In the long term, we may become very different people than we are today.
Looking forward, the step take us through learning about our good and bad behaviors, changing those behaviors to better, addressing social issues, ongoing self education and spreading the message/program in a meme like fashion.
We come to this overeating problem with a great range in our philosophy of life, emotional growth, and behaviors, and some how we all have this same problem(s). In later discussion, I will refer to 6 typical groups of causes:
Ultimately, the purpose of reprogramming is to stimulate a sufficient change to bring about a immediate and complete end to this overeating problem. So if a modern philosopher wrote the 12 steps, what would step one look like? Using Socratic sort of questioning as a method, I suggest the that would look something like: We recognized that we have a problem with our weight which is brought about by eating to much in general. Carbohydrates are the worst, while fats and excess proteins contribute. The overeating has causes, to be explored later. The overeating and obesity has wreaked havoc in our lives and now needs to addressed.
Step 2 would be something like: We realize that the solution to this problem can be help explore the causes, potential solutions and management strategies to overcome the problem. Step 3 will need to lay out the trichotomy, try the program, or not, or explore the program further before making a decision. What the program consists of is yet to be explored.
In the short term the program requires three small meals each day and a full schedule of activities between meals. In the long term, we may become very different people than we are today.
Looking forward, the step take us through learning about our good and bad behaviors, changing those behaviors to better, addressing social issues, ongoing self education and spreading the message/program in a meme like fashion.
We come to this overeating problem with a great range in our philosophy of life, emotional growth, and behaviors, and some how we all have this same problem(s). In later discussion, I will refer to 6 typical groups of causes:
- Food knowledge, self knowledge, education in general...
- Physical conditions that cause or contribute, physiology...
- Environmental factors, effects of specific substances
- Social factors, relationships
- Maladaptive behaviors, emotional, stress, anxiety, inactivity
- Food addiction - chemicals in the food causing
Monday, December 7, 2015
Self Reprograming (4) Emotion Displacement
The following is a summary of the main points: Emotions are contagious. Positive emotions can replace negative or neutral emotions. We can only hold one emotion at a time. Emotions can cycle quickly through a series like desire or baiting, cannot have, deprivation, to resolution, control, power, and this is a learned skill. Some people learn how to manipulate ourselves by manipulating our own emotions naturally, often without even realizing we have done that. Others of us must make an effort in learning this skill. Emotions can be managed.
Our behavior and those around us can influence our emotions. The arts can have a similar impact, or so I understand. Most of the "arts" do not impact me much, so I will take that at their word. What do I know. People around me influence the way I feel to some extent. Positively or negatively. When we know we do so much better with positive emotions, it is difficult to be around a negative person. All this I take as proof that emotions are contagious, and therefore we can infect ourselves with positive emotions, and should at every opportunity, without getting silly.
Positive psychology starts with positive emotion and grows from there. It needs the positive seed. Once the positive seed takes hold, it can grow through interest, engagement, commitment, meaning and bloom into achievement. We get the positive seed through seeing and feeling some success.
How does this relate to overeating? When someone offers chocolate to me, I can decline it without any problem, as I recognize it for what it is to me, a good tasting poison, that one bite has the power to blow me up a hundred pounds in a few months, to where I become so uncomfortable that I question the purpose of life and of continuing to live. I am addicted to chocolate, and cannot take even one bite without starting the slide down into hell that I have experienced. I am also addicted to sugar, junk food, wheat products, potatoes, nuts, bananas, and the like.
It is difficult to be around those who do not have issues with these as I can feel deprived if I allow myself to remember the taste, or how it felt at the first bite. If I remember how I felt at he last bite, I feel pity for those who are still addicted to those poisons, and that give me a feeling of power and control which are positive emotions. That removes or displaces the feeling of deprivation and replaces it with a ego burst of power. One emotion displaces the previous; hence, in a general way, we can only have one emotion at a time. We can learn to do this, to return to an satisfied emotion where joy and tranquility can flourish.
But then what do I know?
Our behavior and those around us can influence our emotions. The arts can have a similar impact, or so I understand. Most of the "arts" do not impact me much, so I will take that at their word. What do I know. People around me influence the way I feel to some extent. Positively or negatively. When we know we do so much better with positive emotions, it is difficult to be around a negative person. All this I take as proof that emotions are contagious, and therefore we can infect ourselves with positive emotions, and should at every opportunity, without getting silly.
Positive psychology starts with positive emotion and grows from there. It needs the positive seed. Once the positive seed takes hold, it can grow through interest, engagement, commitment, meaning and bloom into achievement. We get the positive seed through seeing and feeling some success.
How does this relate to overeating? When someone offers chocolate to me, I can decline it without any problem, as I recognize it for what it is to me, a good tasting poison, that one bite has the power to blow me up a hundred pounds in a few months, to where I become so uncomfortable that I question the purpose of life and of continuing to live. I am addicted to chocolate, and cannot take even one bite without starting the slide down into hell that I have experienced. I am also addicted to sugar, junk food, wheat products, potatoes, nuts, bananas, and the like.
It is difficult to be around those who do not have issues with these as I can feel deprived if I allow myself to remember the taste, or how it felt at the first bite. If I remember how I felt at he last bite, I feel pity for those who are still addicted to those poisons, and that give me a feeling of power and control which are positive emotions. That removes or displaces the feeling of deprivation and replaces it with a ego burst of power. One emotion displaces the previous; hence, in a general way, we can only have one emotion at a time. We can learn to do this, to return to an satisfied emotion where joy and tranquility can flourish.
But then what do I know?
Saturday, December 5, 2015
Self Reprograming (3) Purpose
What is the purpose of self reprogramming?
Ultimately, I believe, that the purpose can be described as creating in ourselves a necessary and sufficient personality change to bring about an end to the problem, in this case, to bring an end to overeating.
First, we need to identify the problem as our behavior and recognize that we can change our behavior when faced with this problem. Exactly what part of our personality is to be changed or what it is to be changed to is up for debate.
We must become willing to identify and change our behavior, not try to change the environment we live in. We cannot get out of a food rich environment... It is just not practical for many of us. That would mean living by myself... in the bush... separated from civilization. A Thoreau like experience at Walden's Pond. It means wanting and desiring to be able to change.
What needs to be changed is often the question. It is us, our thinking, our philosophy, and ultimately our behavior. We cannot just change behavior without changing our thinking first or near simultaneously. First we need to figure out what aspect need to be changed, and how to make that change. That is the hard part.
Sustained effort to correct the problem, absolutely and completely is required. Complete abstinence from that behavior, or chemical or substance is required. We cannot even give ourselves the change to use.
I am of Irish/Prussian extraction, and I am addicted to the potato, wheat, grains and sugar, aka carbohydrates. It is a bitch to get off of, and to stay off of. I also am cheap and I grow good potatoes. I was raise on them, they are a traditional food... what is one to do.
But then, what do I know?
Ultimately, I believe, that the purpose can be described as creating in ourselves a necessary and sufficient personality change to bring about an end to the problem, in this case, to bring an end to overeating.
First, we need to identify the problem as our behavior and recognize that we can change our behavior when faced with this problem. Exactly what part of our personality is to be changed or what it is to be changed to is up for debate.
We must become willing to identify and change our behavior, not try to change the environment we live in. We cannot get out of a food rich environment... It is just not practical for many of us. That would mean living by myself... in the bush... separated from civilization. A Thoreau like experience at Walden's Pond. It means wanting and desiring to be able to change.
What needs to be changed is often the question. It is us, our thinking, our philosophy, and ultimately our behavior. We cannot just change behavior without changing our thinking first or near simultaneously. First we need to figure out what aspect need to be changed, and how to make that change. That is the hard part.
Sustained effort to correct the problem, absolutely and completely is required. Complete abstinence from that behavior, or chemical or substance is required. We cannot even give ourselves the change to use.
I am of Irish/Prussian extraction, and I am addicted to the potato, wheat, grains and sugar, aka carbohydrates. It is a bitch to get off of, and to stay off of. I also am cheap and I grow good potatoes. I was raise on them, they are a traditional food... what is one to do.
But then, what do I know?
Friday, December 4, 2015
Reprograming self (2) Things up to self
Some things are up to us, and some are not. That is hard to argue against. It is the list of things that are up to us is where difficulty starts.
Our opinions are up to us, but we are biased by our upbringing. But we have free will. Will is only free as long as there is no coercion, or other forms of repercussion. So how is a child supposed to go against the wishes of parents when the parent belongs in a lunatic asylum? Or a young adult even, who is not dependent on parents, who's choices would be opposed by the parent, is that really free will? So we have the right to choose but not the freedom to do so, but at times we must choose and bare with the consequences.
We have free choice over our desires, as desires are not physical, but just a mental concept of desire. These can produce expectations and delusions that will cause problem later, but we have power over our desires. The advertising can endeavor to raise an eager want in us, but ultimately, desires are within our power.
Our motivations are within our power. That is not to say that we can achieve what we want, for we are limited by physical factors like our body and memory.
Our beliefs and values are within our power. This makes us responsible for what we actually believe as adults, and what we do as a result of those beliefs. We have the freedom to review and accept or reject, change our beliefs at any time. That is true freedom. Reason and logic can be the true driver of all our actions.
Ethics, virtues, and the like can drive our decisions, not historical cultural rote. Yes, we have the responsibility as adults to review and change where needed, and to changer our culture, based on ethics and virtue. Here we need to know our priorities, facts, truths, and not get swayed by emotions. The political bodies can paint pretty pictures that are half-truths if not outright lies. We need to sort out the reality, and live by virtues, regardless of government programs and attempts at social engineering, or environmental reactionaryism.
On those things that are beyond our power, we have influence or partial control over a few, and much more that we have no control over. Those we just must let go of the responsibility for and learn to live with, making what changes we can. We can only change ourselves.
We can educate ourselves to a large extent. Some of the best education is self directed, along the lines that you find interesting. It does not need to turn into money making education, it can be for your own benefit, or to aid in sorting of fact from conjecture or promotional materials or government propaganda. There is a great deal of that to go around, even in the "free" world.
But what do I know?
Our opinions are up to us, but we are biased by our upbringing. But we have free will. Will is only free as long as there is no coercion, or other forms of repercussion. So how is a child supposed to go against the wishes of parents when the parent belongs in a lunatic asylum? Or a young adult even, who is not dependent on parents, who's choices would be opposed by the parent, is that really free will? So we have the right to choose but not the freedom to do so, but at times we must choose and bare with the consequences.
We have free choice over our desires, as desires are not physical, but just a mental concept of desire. These can produce expectations and delusions that will cause problem later, but we have power over our desires. The advertising can endeavor to raise an eager want in us, but ultimately, desires are within our power.
Our motivations are within our power. That is not to say that we can achieve what we want, for we are limited by physical factors like our body and memory.
Our beliefs and values are within our power. This makes us responsible for what we actually believe as adults, and what we do as a result of those beliefs. We have the freedom to review and accept or reject, change our beliefs at any time. That is true freedom. Reason and logic can be the true driver of all our actions.
Ethics, virtues, and the like can drive our decisions, not historical cultural rote. Yes, we have the responsibility as adults to review and change where needed, and to changer our culture, based on ethics and virtue. Here we need to know our priorities, facts, truths, and not get swayed by emotions. The political bodies can paint pretty pictures that are half-truths if not outright lies. We need to sort out the reality, and live by virtues, regardless of government programs and attempts at social engineering, or environmental reactionaryism.
On those things that are beyond our power, we have influence or partial control over a few, and much more that we have no control over. Those we just must let go of the responsibility for and learn to live with, making what changes we can. We can only change ourselves.
We can educate ourselves to a large extent. Some of the best education is self directed, along the lines that you find interesting. It does not need to turn into money making education, it can be for your own benefit, or to aid in sorting of fact from conjecture or promotional materials or government propaganda. There is a great deal of that to go around, even in the "free" world.
But what do I know?
Thursday, December 3, 2015
Reprograming self (1) Assent
The process of reprogramming of self has been for me convoluted. There is no manual. There is little help that know the solution, for the solution must be unique to us, as individuals. We do not start at the same place, nor go in the same direction.
I think that the underlying principal is that we all have the right of assenting to a preposition. That is we can agree with a statement, but really we have possibly four choices, assent, rejection, we can withhold a decision for further study or just reject the whole consideration and leave. We can, at a later time, also change our minds, or modify our thoughts on the matter or not. We are free.
I am now free of religion. That is not to say that I disagree with all of there teachings, just the supernatural garbage, old stories, and the like. We need to understand our self selected purpose on earth that we choose for ourselves. We need a clear direction to proceed, and that self selected purpose gives us direction. We need to undertake that purpose with a positive attitude and clear head. We need to understand that if we are going to survive and flourish in the upcoming years, we need to be active and follow a reasonable plan including food, activity, philosophy, and learn to be free from all religious supernatural and irrational thinking. We need to become the rational beings that we are, all while living in these animal bodies and having animal urges. The next stage of evolution is on us.
This rational evolution is not uniform, some have evolved, and some have not. That does not matter, we each will evolve, one at a time or die off. The important issue is that we each have that choice, assent, or withhold assent until we have studied this whole concept a bit more. The first step is to recognize that it is up to each one of us. The choice is ours to make, free of influence.
But what do I know?
I think that the underlying principal is that we all have the right of assenting to a preposition. That is we can agree with a statement, but really we have possibly four choices, assent, rejection, we can withhold a decision for further study or just reject the whole consideration and leave. We can, at a later time, also change our minds, or modify our thoughts on the matter or not. We are free.
I am now free of religion. That is not to say that I disagree with all of there teachings, just the supernatural garbage, old stories, and the like. We need to understand our self selected purpose on earth that we choose for ourselves. We need a clear direction to proceed, and that self selected purpose gives us direction. We need to undertake that purpose with a positive attitude and clear head. We need to understand that if we are going to survive and flourish in the upcoming years, we need to be active and follow a reasonable plan including food, activity, philosophy, and learn to be free from all religious supernatural and irrational thinking. We need to become the rational beings that we are, all while living in these animal bodies and having animal urges. The next stage of evolution is on us.
This rational evolution is not uniform, some have evolved, and some have not. That does not matter, we each will evolve, one at a time or die off. The important issue is that we each have that choice, assent, or withhold assent until we have studied this whole concept a bit more. The first step is to recognize that it is up to each one of us. The choice is ours to make, free of influence.
But what do I know?
Wednesday, December 2, 2015
Natural Religion
I am reading the Arrian - Complete Works - a Delphi Classics, and came across the term, natural religion, in the introduction to the enchiridion. For those of you who do not know, Arrian (86 - 160 CE) was the student of Epictetus who wrote down his lectures, and became a history author or history chronicler in his day. Epictetus was a famous Stoic. The Stoics understand the human mind better that most psychologists today, and provide logical solutions to many of life's problems that apply even today.
Natural religion is based on reason rather that divine revelation. Other sources quote it as being defined by the belief that there is only nature, and all come from nature. Wikipedia says: in which God, the soul, spirits, and all objects of the supernatural are considered as part of nature and not separate from it. Conversely, it is also used in philosophy, specifically Roman Catholic philosophy, to describe some aspects of religion that are knowable apart from divine revelation. It seems to me to be an oxymoron of sorts. Wikipedia is out to lunch.
Natural religion is based on reason, and reason says that there is only nature. The supernatural cannot exist inside nature, as to be supernatural, it would be greater than nature. There is something wrong here. Abandon Wiki on this point.
Each translation has a different twist on some points. It is within our power also to believe or not believe anything we are taught by our parents, the community, schools and universities. Some of what we were taught is just wrong, and religion in general is just wrong... there is nothing beyond nature. It is nature that drives us to overeat, and knowing this, we can derive strategies to some of the causes of overeating, like food addiction.
As far a I am concerned, food addiction is caused by some chemicals in the food, or situation that causes us to desire more of that food. It does not matter if that is a cultural food or not. Currently it is the problem and must be completely abandoned. Letting go of specific foods is necessary, regardless of what others say. Quantity control may also be necessary for some slippery foods, but that has nothing to do with natural religion.
The point I am trying to get at with this is all we have is nature, external, internal, then we have logic and the mind. We need to accept nature, there is nothing we can do about it, but we can behave in ways to not create a problem for ourselves, even if others are not happy with our behaviors.
Natural religion is based on reason rather that divine revelation. Other sources quote it as being defined by the belief that there is only nature, and all come from nature. Wikipedia says: in which God, the soul, spirits, and all objects of the supernatural are considered as part of nature and not separate from it. Conversely, it is also used in philosophy, specifically Roman Catholic philosophy, to describe some aspects of religion that are knowable apart from divine revelation. It seems to me to be an oxymoron of sorts. Wikipedia is out to lunch.
Natural religion is based on reason, and reason says that there is only nature. The supernatural cannot exist inside nature, as to be supernatural, it would be greater than nature. There is something wrong here. Abandon Wiki on this point.
Each translation has a different twist on some points. It is within our power also to believe or not believe anything we are taught by our parents, the community, schools and universities. Some of what we were taught is just wrong, and religion in general is just wrong... there is nothing beyond nature. It is nature that drives us to overeat, and knowing this, we can derive strategies to some of the causes of overeating, like food addiction.
As far a I am concerned, food addiction is caused by some chemicals in the food, or situation that causes us to desire more of that food. It does not matter if that is a cultural food or not. Currently it is the problem and must be completely abandoned. Letting go of specific foods is necessary, regardless of what others say. Quantity control may also be necessary for some slippery foods, but that has nothing to do with natural religion.
The point I am trying to get at with this is all we have is nature, external, internal, then we have logic and the mind. We need to accept nature, there is nothing we can do about it, but we can behave in ways to not create a problem for ourselves, even if others are not happy with our behaviors.
Sunday, November 22, 2015
Acceptance.. accept that we have been wrong
It is difficult for anyone to accept that they have been wrong there entire life. And not only they but ancestors, going back a long way have been wrong about specific beliefs. And then there is all the time we spent learning and expanding the details of that wrong belief. That is not to say that some of what we learned was not right and good. But the underlying belief was just wrong. There is/was no god, just nature. God was what we did not understand, an explanation for the unknown. We know more now, but not all. It was nature, all natural events that brought life. The details have not yet been worked out, but there is enough record to see that it occurred naturally.
In the lab,sciences have constructed reproducing, feeding, organism, and then were shut down out of fear that if this got away... It could destroy our life, as we know it. The US produced a modified lyme disease as a biological weapon, and it got out of captivity... likely. So perhaps, exploring the unknown has risks, but so does continuing to believe in religions. In a post at
http://fredjustdoinglife.blogspot.ca/ , I started to explore alternatives. There is much exploring that needs to be done. It may lead nowhere, but does provide a distraction.
What should we believe in modern life? What should the modern philosophy of life look like? Exploring is the only way to generate alternatives. We are not bound by historical views. There are always new and different ways to compare and ratchet toward a better way. Abandoning a fixed belief in a god, or accepting that it need not be true is the first step in enlightenment, what ever that is.
Delusions of what life should be must also be let go of. I do not know. I have reached a time and position in my life that I do not need to spend most of it struggling to survive. I am retired. I have time to explore this nebulous issue. It also relates to overeating in some way, for OA perhaps found a correlation between beliefs overeating. This is not clear by any means, but if overeating is indeed psychological/philosophical there may be a link.
What is the ultimate test? Is there some physical evidence of the existence? That which is common between many of the belief systems may be correct. That which is disputed may not be correct. Doing that which is rational may be the better direction, while concepts like optimization require more data than we have.
Believing that for which there is physical evidence to support the concept is likely the place to start. Evolution, science, even the soft sciences. Start with positive psychology, and go from there. Positive psychology conforms to Stoic thought, and has some evidence, or more correctly, positive test results, suggesting it is a place to start, at least. It starts the cycle, positive attitude, engagement, meaning, and if fate permits, achievement, satisfaction, joy, feeding back into positive attitude.
But what do I know?
In the lab,sciences have constructed reproducing, feeding, organism, and then were shut down out of fear that if this got away... It could destroy our life, as we know it. The US produced a modified lyme disease as a biological weapon, and it got out of captivity... likely. So perhaps, exploring the unknown has risks, but so does continuing to believe in religions. In a post at
http://fredjustdoinglife.blogspot.ca/ , I started to explore alternatives. There is much exploring that needs to be done. It may lead nowhere, but does provide a distraction.
What should we believe in modern life? What should the modern philosophy of life look like? Exploring is the only way to generate alternatives. We are not bound by historical views. There are always new and different ways to compare and ratchet toward a better way. Abandoning a fixed belief in a god, or accepting that it need not be true is the first step in enlightenment, what ever that is.
Delusions of what life should be must also be let go of. I do not know. I have reached a time and position in my life that I do not need to spend most of it struggling to survive. I am retired. I have time to explore this nebulous issue. It also relates to overeating in some way, for OA perhaps found a correlation between beliefs overeating. This is not clear by any means, but if overeating is indeed psychological/philosophical there may be a link.
What is the ultimate test? Is there some physical evidence of the existence? That which is common between many of the belief systems may be correct. That which is disputed may not be correct. Doing that which is rational may be the better direction, while concepts like optimization require more data than we have.
Believing that for which there is physical evidence to support the concept is likely the place to start. Evolution, science, even the soft sciences. Start with positive psychology, and go from there. Positive psychology conforms to Stoic thought, and has some evidence, or more correctly, positive test results, suggesting it is a place to start, at least. It starts the cycle, positive attitude, engagement, meaning, and if fate permits, achievement, satisfaction, joy, feeding back into positive attitude.
But what do I know?
Monday, November 16, 2015
How do we stay clean in a dumpster diving?
The question is simple in the end, "How do we stay clean in a dumpster diving?" The answer has to be you cannot, or with much difficulty. There is no other suitable answer. So what am I on about?
I have been serving as a "expert witness" to reality in a law suit case between a home owner and the city, on the side of the city. It is a "fragile skull" case, where the city is responsible for vibration damage, a minor part of the damage to a house which suffers from desiccated soils, which the city is not responsible for. The house foundations should have been mudjacked years ago, long before the city project, but it was not. The owner considered it just fine before. The house had become stressed in many ways.
The vibration event occurred, two years of LRT construction. Now where shrinkage of soil occurs, the soil may separate from the foundation rather than completely settle. This is due to bridging, hogging, and structural stiffness of the foundation walls. This is the purpose they are intended for, but not to the extent that occurs with desiccated soils.
Vibration creates forces in 3D space, radial outward, vertical and tangential to the radius. The vertical are +/- a few percent of gravity, the radial are substantial, and the tangential the lesser lateral force and out of time with the radial. So any damage that is due to lateral radial force is likely vibration damage, if there is nothing else that would cause lateral forces.
So when one shakes a fragile house, and some stress is released by cracking and vertical settlement, who is responsible? And then settlement continues due to additional desiccation, who is responsible?
Now lawyers do not need to tell the truth, or accept reality. The legal system is a dumpster where the worst of the dirt can be found, so the question is how does one keep from letting any of the stupidity, ignorance, and other bullshit rub off onto a expert? And more to the point, how can we remain untroubled by what we see, hear, and understand? Because the home owner did not notice the movement or did not acknowledge movement does not mean it was not there. And home owner's lawyer is aslimy piece of shit weasel, for the lack of a better description, who does not accept reality.
There is damage, but not a new house's worth.
I have been serving as a "expert witness" to reality in a law suit case between a home owner and the city, on the side of the city. It is a "fragile skull" case, where the city is responsible for vibration damage, a minor part of the damage to a house which suffers from desiccated soils, which the city is not responsible for. The house foundations should have been mudjacked years ago, long before the city project, but it was not. The owner considered it just fine before. The house had become stressed in many ways.
The vibration event occurred, two years of LRT construction. Now where shrinkage of soil occurs, the soil may separate from the foundation rather than completely settle. This is due to bridging, hogging, and structural stiffness of the foundation walls. This is the purpose they are intended for, but not to the extent that occurs with desiccated soils.
Vibration creates forces in 3D space, radial outward, vertical and tangential to the radius. The vertical are +/- a few percent of gravity, the radial are substantial, and the tangential the lesser lateral force and out of time with the radial. So any damage that is due to lateral radial force is likely vibration damage, if there is nothing else that would cause lateral forces.
So when one shakes a fragile house, and some stress is released by cracking and vertical settlement, who is responsible? And then settlement continues due to additional desiccation, who is responsible?
Now lawyers do not need to tell the truth, or accept reality. The legal system is a dumpster where the worst of the dirt can be found, so the question is how does one keep from letting any of the stupidity, ignorance, and other bullshit rub off onto a expert? And more to the point, how can we remain untroubled by what we see, hear, and understand? Because the home owner did not notice the movement or did not acknowledge movement does not mean it was not there. And home owner's lawyer is a
There is damage, but not a new house's worth.
Saturday, November 7, 2015
Treatment of Hyperinsulinemia plus insulin resistance
Hyperinsulinemia and Insulin Resistance, hunger at a cellular level plus high blood sugar. The hunger feeds back through the symmetric nerve system to the mid-brain and we have the desire to eat, appetite, in the fed state.
It is difficult to constantly resist the desire to eat, long term. That is what is necessary. Therein lies the problem.
It is difficult to constantly resist the desire to eat, long term. That is what is necessary. Therein lies the problem.
are eating disorders simply hyperinsulinemia?
http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/103/4/513.full
Is hyperinsulinemia the simple explanation for the whole problem of binge eating disorder. We are hungry at a cellular level.
Is hyperinsulinemia the simple explanation for the whole problem of binge eating disorder. We are hungry at a cellular level.
Thursday, November 5, 2015
Treatment for Compulsive overeating
Here is what Mayo Clinic says:
OA works for those who can blindly accept and live a delusion. But what about those of us who cannot accept a delusion?
Psychotherapy
Whether in individual or group sessions, psychotherapy (also called talk therapy) can help teach you how to exchange unhealthy habits for healthy ones and reduce bingeing episodes. Examples of psychotherapy include:- Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). CBT may help you cope better with issues that can trigger binge-eating episodes, such as negative feelings about your body or a depressed mood. It may also give you a better sense of control over your behavior and help you regulate eating patterns.
- Interpersonal psychotherapy. This type of therapy focuses on your relationships with other people. The goal is to improve your interpersonal skills — how you relate to others, including family, friends and co-workers. This may help reduce binge eating that's triggered by poor relationships and unhealthy communication skills.
- Dialectical behavior therapy. This form of therapy can help you learn behavioral skills to help you tolerate stress, regulate your emotions and improve your relationships with others, all of which can reduce the desire to binge eat.
OA works for those who can blindly accept and live a delusion. But what about those of us who cannot accept a delusion?
Wednesday, November 4, 2015
Where does the desire to overeat come from?
Where does the desire to overeat come from? My desire I refer to that uncontrollable force, irrational force that drives us overeaters to eat. Craving does not describe the force I speak of adequately. It is stronger and more persistence than for sex, than work, than anything else. It cannot be a common drive, for many do not experience it, else wise they would eat. It is not universal force, and those who do not desire may not ever experience that force. Many deny the existence of such a force. If they have never felt it, I can see it would be logical to deny the existence, as some deny the existence of god, or likewise believe in a god. It is that simple.
Does the desire arise from a physical deficiency, malabsorption, or other physical issue that causes a drive at the primary brain - reptile brain level, as the desire for self preservation or sex or food in a starved and baited condition? Does our body thinking it is in starvation mode?
We need to eat enough to feel satisfaction else wise we are just torturing ourselves. Is our delayed satisfaction due to to high expectations or are we just living an unpleasant existence? What is a reasonable level of expectations? That we be able to eat a small meal and be satisfied, or is that too much?
Some say it is lack of self control. Bool, my new word of the day. Bunk likely. Of the obese people I know, you will not find a more will-powered group.
When I googled this topic it returned a bunch of articles that talk about it like the answer is simple just do not eat/or eat as required. like http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/03/why-we-keep-overeating-and-what-we-can-do-about-it/253906/
Useless advise... that displays a lack of understanding of the problem.... to be successful, we (I) need to understand the force, to eliminate the force, and not go there.
But then, what do I know?
Does the desire arise from a physical deficiency, malabsorption, or other physical issue that causes a drive at the primary brain - reptile brain level, as the desire for self preservation or sex or food in a starved and baited condition? Does our body thinking it is in starvation mode?
We need to eat enough to feel satisfaction else wise we are just torturing ourselves. Is our delayed satisfaction due to to high expectations or are we just living an unpleasant existence? What is a reasonable level of expectations? That we be able to eat a small meal and be satisfied, or is that too much?
Some say it is lack of self control. Bool, my new word of the day. Bunk likely. Of the obese people I know, you will not find a more will-powered group.
When I googled this topic it returned a bunch of articles that talk about it like the answer is simple just do not eat/or eat as required. like http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/03/why-we-keep-overeating-and-what-we-can-do-about-it/253906/
Useless advise... that displays a lack of understanding of the problem.... to be successful, we (I) need to understand the force, to eliminate the force, and not go there.
But then, what do I know?
Saturday, October 31, 2015
Back to near normal
As a slum landlord, (not by intent, but by time, the houses got old.) I have deal with two long term renters moving out, and leaving twenty years of damage on two houses. That has involved me taking a bit of time to do renovations on those rentals. That has taken me away from contemplation of my issues.
It is apparent to me that I have some unknown force driving me to overeat. Something is causing a desire to eat. It is mental issue, but I cannot define it better. When I was young and single, I had a desire for sex, and it is that kind of desire, that hardly goes away. After a meal the desire is back shortly. It is sightly different than actual hunger, and hunger is less of a driving force. It this a eating disorder, a mental defect or something similar?
As I look at 12 step process assumption that overeating is a moral/social issue, I call bullshit. It is a physical/psychological/genetic problem. There is no god, just nature. No purpose, beyond the natural imperative of flourishing, unless we paint one on. We humans have near reached the maximum population of this world, local overpopulation is common occurrences. We have not had a mass die off for some time. A few wars, 1919 flu, 1850 Irish potato famine, and the like do not even show on the world population curve.
Evolution continues. It just remains to be seen which portion of the population, which traits nature selects after the next mass die off.
I guess what I am thinking is " is overeating, diabetes, metabolic syndrome and the like going to be the next plague."
Here is a video worth watching https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iMmvu9eMrg
It is apparent to me that I have some unknown force driving me to overeat. Something is causing a desire to eat. It is mental issue, but I cannot define it better. When I was young and single, I had a desire for sex, and it is that kind of desire, that hardly goes away. After a meal the desire is back shortly. It is sightly different than actual hunger, and hunger is less of a driving force. It this a eating disorder, a mental defect or something similar?
As I look at 12 step process assumption that overeating is a moral/social issue, I call bullshit. It is a physical/psychological/genetic problem. There is no god, just nature. No purpose, beyond the natural imperative of flourishing, unless we paint one on. We humans have near reached the maximum population of this world, local overpopulation is common occurrences. We have not had a mass die off for some time. A few wars, 1919 flu, 1850 Irish potato famine, and the like do not even show on the world population curve.
Evolution continues. It just remains to be seen which portion of the population, which traits nature selects after the next mass die off.
I guess what I am thinking is " is overeating, diabetes, metabolic syndrome and the like going to be the next plague."
Here is a video worth watching https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iMmvu9eMrg
Thursday, October 8, 2015
Beliefs
We are obligated to act as our opinions and beliefs dictate. We can believe in reducing out carbon footprint, spend much extra money on solar and wind energy, and not actually reduce our carbon footprint, only think we do. We can create an industry like the Alberta oil sands, buy undervalued natural gas to produce overvalued synthetic crude, and hush anyone who has actually worked out the energy balance equation on those plants. Oh well, they create work.
We see vegetarians destroying there health for a "kill no animals" philosophy. It is our beliefs, values and opinions that drive us, even when our beliefs, values and opinions are sometime just wrong. Some of the time our actions are just wrong... consider ISIL, and then some of the time our actions just do not matter... consider most religions.
Our big world problem is still local / regional overpopulation and religious wars.
But what do I know?
We see vegetarians destroying there health for a "kill no animals" philosophy. It is our beliefs, values and opinions that drive us, even when our beliefs, values and opinions are sometime just wrong. Some of the time our actions are just wrong... consider ISIL, and then some of the time our actions just do not matter... consider most religions.
Our big world problem is still local / regional overpopulation and religious wars.
But what do I know?
Sunday, September 20, 2015
Human Animals
Are we social animals or a group of individuals who realized that we could do better in groups? Group sizes have grown to country size. Every now and then, a country size group decides to split and expel part of that group from the area. Civil war, but the split is usually ideological, even religion is an ideology, even if the religious have different name for it. Ideology is just plain stupid to kill over, for it is not real, but a concept. If you do not follow my concepts, I will kill you thinking. Control freaks of the highest order.
In reality, there is the world we live in, nature, and then there is the human animal. We are animal first, with our triune brains. We are big groups of individuals, each with our own ideas. There are those among us that try to sell us on belief systems, become a follower and stop having to think for yourself type schemes. We can be part of these and not even realize it. We can be born into one of these groups, grow and flourish in them, die, and the whole time not even realize this basic fact. That is the sad part of religions. In principal it sound great, but now we have a number of such schemes at odds with each other. We have religious wars mixed with Civil war in Syria and it is a mess. It is time to give up religion. Period. What else is there to do? Learn to live well and rationally, without religions. And stop killing each other.
We have reached a state of local overpopulation, and have been doing this for the last 100 years, resulting in migrations from political/religious oppression. In historical times it was more often food/water/economy type migration forces. In general, our world has become overpopulated in larger portions, and now much of the US and Canada are overpopulated, that is more people than the country can support. We have vast tracks of land where few can make a living in. Those that do live like the human animals that they are, not the economic adapted peoples of the world, but basic hunter/gather, but they also want the benefits of modern urban populations, yet are unable to generate the revenue required to buy those services from there undertakings, expect for resource extraction. OH well, this is Canada, and we in the South support the north, and natives, and welfare, and the health industry, and the processed food industry, but not the farmers.
But then what do I know?
In reality, there is the world we live in, nature, and then there is the human animal. We are animal first, with our triune brains. We are big groups of individuals, each with our own ideas. There are those among us that try to sell us on belief systems, become a follower and stop having to think for yourself type schemes. We can be part of these and not even realize it. We can be born into one of these groups, grow and flourish in them, die, and the whole time not even realize this basic fact. That is the sad part of religions. In principal it sound great, but now we have a number of such schemes at odds with each other. We have religious wars mixed with Civil war in Syria and it is a mess. It is time to give up religion. Period. What else is there to do? Learn to live well and rationally, without religions. And stop killing each other.
We have reached a state of local overpopulation, and have been doing this for the last 100 years, resulting in migrations from political/religious oppression. In historical times it was more often food/water/economy type migration forces. In general, our world has become overpopulated in larger portions, and now much of the US and Canada are overpopulated, that is more people than the country can support. We have vast tracks of land where few can make a living in. Those that do live like the human animals that they are, not the economic adapted peoples of the world, but basic hunter/gather, but they also want the benefits of modern urban populations, yet are unable to generate the revenue required to buy those services from there undertakings, expect for resource extraction. OH well, this is Canada, and we in the South support the north, and natives, and welfare, and the health industry, and the processed food industry, but not the farmers.
But then what do I know?
Tuesday, September 15, 2015
Yah But
A bit of exchange between myself and laurainman got me thinking.
http://thelivingphilosopher.com/2015/09/15/its-that-most-horrible-time-of-the-year/
The difference "what people could be" and "what humans are" explains a lot of failure of philosophy. Communism for example. Give to the state in accordance with your ability, and take from the state in accordance with your need, but greed takes over and there is nothing left. This is similar to some of our native Indians today in Canada, but I digress.
People could be much more compassionate, but with the present greed culture, compassion is not a characteristic of the self sustaining person. The compassionate are overrun, and used, until they are poor or wise up. Just try being a landlord, and here the whining about the rent, the hardships, and they live in a bigger, nicer place than I would afford myself. My needs are simple. Compassion is a nice characteristic, but just not practical in so many places.
I had an old buddy that owned a sawmill. He always need labor on the green chain, cleaners, stackers, etc. Low skill, outside work, live in the dry camp, room and board. Anyone begging he told they could have a job if they wanted, all they need to do was show up for the company buss at the weekly shift change. He said he never had one show up in twenty years of offering. Compassion yes but they need to make an effort first.
Compassionate is a virtue that is easy to over do. My mother and sister would do anything for anyone, as long as they were not family. Oh well. Mother died alone and my sister and I exchange perhaps 4 short emails a year. The Buddhist push compassion, and I thing it is a great virtue where no one has much anyway, but it can get out of hand. I need to be able to survive for perhaps 25-30 years on savings after retirement, so compassion only goes so far when I see waste and lack of effort. Compassion for those who need it is a different issue.
Now consider the Religious Wars of the middle east. Religions in general are irrational, but some more so. Would I reach out to anyone who is possible dangerous? Not likely. Children and family's who are willing to give up their religion are worthy of help, anyone else is for other to help. It must be something that I am comfortable with. If not, it has nothing to do with me. We must realize that religion is the cause of the war, all religions.
The other issue is control of people and dictatorship of ideas. If they do not agree with my ideas, they can believe what ever foolishness they wish. I will not have a dog in that race. What people could be is an idea, but when we consider what they actually are, it is a different story. We live in a community that has become a group of individuals, not a society in the old sense, where everybody knew everybody. Transportation and communications have changed all that. We have not yet worked out how to live in this new reality. We see the results of local overpopulation, either economic, food supply, water, energy or political/religious where a group of people are pushed out to fend for themselves, elsewhere. Some chose to leave on their own, aka refugees. It is still overpopulation, and we, here are already overpopulated.
It is my prediction that I may live to see the next major die off humans, in evolutionary terms. (say the next 25 years). The population if no die off occurs will need to address the rate of growth soon, else difficulties will be more common. In twenty five years, the population will double. Can you live with double the population? Can the middle east or Germany? Africa? China is not a problem, they addresses the issue with one child policy. India?
How does compassion fit in with a major die off? Well we all go down or will we save ourselves? We can see this coming, for those who do not act, how much compassion should I show?
But what do I know?
http://thelivingphilosopher.com/2015/09/15/its-that-most-horrible-time-of-the-year/
The difference "what people could be" and "what humans are" explains a lot of failure of philosophy. Communism for example. Give to the state in accordance with your ability, and take from the state in accordance with your need, but greed takes over and there is nothing left. This is similar to some of our native Indians today in Canada, but I digress.
People could be much more compassionate, but with the present greed culture, compassion is not a characteristic of the self sustaining person. The compassionate are overrun, and used, until they are poor or wise up. Just try being a landlord, and here the whining about the rent, the hardships, and they live in a bigger, nicer place than I would afford myself. My needs are simple. Compassion is a nice characteristic, but just not practical in so many places.
I had an old buddy that owned a sawmill. He always need labor on the green chain, cleaners, stackers, etc. Low skill, outside work, live in the dry camp, room and board. Anyone begging he told they could have a job if they wanted, all they need to do was show up for the company buss at the weekly shift change. He said he never had one show up in twenty years of offering. Compassion yes but they need to make an effort first.
Compassionate is a virtue that is easy to over do. My mother and sister would do anything for anyone, as long as they were not family. Oh well. Mother died alone and my sister and I exchange perhaps 4 short emails a year. The Buddhist push compassion, and I thing it is a great virtue where no one has much anyway, but it can get out of hand. I need to be able to survive for perhaps 25-30 years on savings after retirement, so compassion only goes so far when I see waste and lack of effort. Compassion for those who need it is a different issue.
Now consider the Religious Wars of the middle east. Religions in general are irrational, but some more so. Would I reach out to anyone who is possible dangerous? Not likely. Children and family's who are willing to give up their religion are worthy of help, anyone else is for other to help. It must be something that I am comfortable with. If not, it has nothing to do with me. We must realize that religion is the cause of the war, all religions.
The other issue is control of people and dictatorship of ideas. If they do not agree with my ideas, they can believe what ever foolishness they wish. I will not have a dog in that race. What people could be is an idea, but when we consider what they actually are, it is a different story. We live in a community that has become a group of individuals, not a society in the old sense, where everybody knew everybody. Transportation and communications have changed all that. We have not yet worked out how to live in this new reality. We see the results of local overpopulation, either economic, food supply, water, energy or political/religious where a group of people are pushed out to fend for themselves, elsewhere. Some chose to leave on their own, aka refugees. It is still overpopulation, and we, here are already overpopulated.
It is my prediction that I may live to see the next major die off humans, in evolutionary terms. (say the next 25 years). The population if no die off occurs will need to address the rate of growth soon, else difficulties will be more common. In twenty five years, the population will double. Can you live with double the population? Can the middle east or Germany? Africa? China is not a problem, they addresses the issue with one child policy. India?
How does compassion fit in with a major die off? Well we all go down or will we save ourselves? We can see this coming, for those who do not act, how much compassion should I show?
But what do I know?
Sunday, September 13, 2015
Stoic Buddhist?
No god, so now it is up to us to live right and get on with building community, spreading wisdom and the like. No god places the responsibility for living rightly, by virtue in stoic terms squarely on us humans. We need to live within what nature throws at us, and be content with what we have. Now what if we could merge Stoic thought and Theravada Buddhism?
Last day we say the second noble truth exposed as Stoic, more or less. The fourth noble truth is indistinguishable from live by virtue, for the eight fold path employs virtue, but without naming it.
The Buddhists place right knowledge first in the eight point path to the good life, while the Stoics name the path living in accordance with virtues and nature. If we do one, we do the other. Wisdom or prudence provide the knowledge and intent; we require the courage, temperance, and justice to do the remaining six: speak, action, livelihood, and to look after our mental self through effort, mindfulness and concentration. The emphasis on what is being taught or described is just different, but combined, these similar, if not identical philosophies, provide a more detailed path to a better life. It is what is considered to be more important that differs, by the ancients, and by the modern teachers. Mediation, to the Stoics was not a field of concentration, but it is for the Buddhists, while ethics was big for the Stoics, it was reduced to prescription through the precepts and other concepts in the Buddhist tradition. There are a group to concepts that are held in common. Impermanence v. constant change, and that all stressing issues are the result of wrong though, delusions of what life should be, v. opinions in our own mind that we have power over.
So what am I saying? After one strips away the language of the system, a sage would be enlightened or enlightened would be a sage. The sage must cut wood and haul water as well. Nothing about that changes. There is this old story of "what does a monk do before enlightenment? He cuts wood and hauls water. And after enlightenment? He cuts wood and hauls water.The Theravada Buddhist will spend more time meditating, while the Stoic will spend the time in analysis and consideration, and both will act with confidence that they are doing right for the right reasons. The Theravada are not as much into mediation as the Zens. They rely more on the prescriptions found in the writings, rather than developing everything from first principals. In the end, after achievements are totaled, I doubt that the result would be distinguishable in many cases. Both would spend there lives tranquil, without hurry, and make about the same decisions. Both would sit likely at sunrise and watch the show, content with what the day might bring.
But what do I know?
Others view on this very subject:
http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.ca/2013/02/buddhism-epicureanism-and-stoicism.html
Karma was a prevailing concept accepted by Buddhists. In a small community, it has some truth to it. Buddha was silent on 19 questions asked of him. Karma and God were two of the questions.
What is "I" is the discussion that leads to the illusion statement. In Stoic terms, "I" is the facility of reason, the part that holds opinions, makes judgements, and does all those things "I" has power over. So is "I" real or an illusion?
http://philosophy.tamu.edu/~sdaniel/Notes/96class23.html
Last day we say the second noble truth exposed as Stoic, more or less. The fourth noble truth is indistinguishable from live by virtue, for the eight fold path employs virtue, but without naming it.
The Buddhists place right knowledge first in the eight point path to the good life, while the Stoics name the path living in accordance with virtues and nature. If we do one, we do the other. Wisdom or prudence provide the knowledge and intent; we require the courage, temperance, and justice to do the remaining six: speak, action, livelihood, and to look after our mental self through effort, mindfulness and concentration. The emphasis on what is being taught or described is just different, but combined, these similar, if not identical philosophies, provide a more detailed path to a better life. It is what is considered to be more important that differs, by the ancients, and by the modern teachers. Mediation, to the Stoics was not a field of concentration, but it is for the Buddhists, while ethics was big for the Stoics, it was reduced to prescription through the precepts and other concepts in the Buddhist tradition. There are a group to concepts that are held in common. Impermanence v. constant change, and that all stressing issues are the result of wrong though, delusions of what life should be, v. opinions in our own mind that we have power over.
So what am I saying? After one strips away the language of the system, a sage would be enlightened or enlightened would be a sage. The sage must cut wood and haul water as well. Nothing about that changes. There is this old story of "what does a monk do before enlightenment? He cuts wood and hauls water. And after enlightenment? He cuts wood and hauls water.The Theravada Buddhist will spend more time meditating, while the Stoic will spend the time in analysis and consideration, and both will act with confidence that they are doing right for the right reasons. The Theravada are not as much into mediation as the Zens. They rely more on the prescriptions found in the writings, rather than developing everything from first principals. In the end, after achievements are totaled, I doubt that the result would be distinguishable in many cases. Both would spend there lives tranquil, without hurry, and make about the same decisions. Both would sit likely at sunrise and watch the show, content with what the day might bring.
But what do I know?
Others view on this very subject:
http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.ca/2013/02/buddhism-epicureanism-and-stoicism.html
Karma was a prevailing concept accepted by Buddhists. In a small community, it has some truth to it. Buddha was silent on 19 questions asked of him. Karma and God were two of the questions.
What is "I" is the discussion that leads to the illusion statement. In Stoic terms, "I" is the facility of reason, the part that holds opinions, makes judgements, and does all those things "I" has power over. So is "I" real or an illusion?
http://philosophy.tamu.edu/~sdaniel/Notes/96class23.html
Friday, September 11, 2015
What is Stocism
There has been much written on subject of stoicism, and much misses the main point. It is not suppression of emotion. It is about understanding the source of the mainly negative emotions, and the causes. The positive emotions are good. Once we understand the cause of negative emotion, it is our choice to get anger or use the negative emotion or see the cause, eliminate the cause, and move on. Some things are up to us, our opinions, our beliefs, our values, our judgements. Live by nature, and to do that we must understand our nature. The product is understanding of our behaviors and thence to have a choice.
It is a form of consequentialism.
There is no reason to get mad at inanimate objects, it is not there fault. They have no intent, no purpose other that which we paint on them. They are a collection of atoms, nothing more. Perhaps the do what we expect by habituation, perhaps not. It is not there fault, they have no intent. It is all in our mind, our intentions, our expectations, our delusions of how life should be, our attachment to a mortal or a thing, or the opposite, our aversions. It is all in our heads. It has nothing to do with the object, it is all us and our mind. In Buddhism, this is the second noble truth.
Now people are just like inanimate objects, but they do form intent, but usually we do not enter into the consideration. We are just moving objects without significance to most others. That is the way we treat many people in the cities where we know few of the surrounding people.
Nature has no intent. It just provides an environment for this opportunistic species, of which we are part, to flourish. There is no plan. Man has created an intent or purpose to develop, a outlet for our natural desires. Directing our desires is man made. Controlling ourselves is good; controlling others leads to resentment, rebellion, resistance, over through, and similar distress.
We need a common goal, often taken to be development of a cosmos, or a flourishing society. Anything that leads to, aids in, supports, sustains, such development is taken as purpose, and is in the right direction.
But what do I know.
It is a form of consequentialism.
There is no reason to get mad at inanimate objects, it is not there fault. They have no intent, no purpose other that which we paint on them. They are a collection of atoms, nothing more. Perhaps the do what we expect by habituation, perhaps not. It is not there fault, they have no intent. It is all in our mind, our intentions, our expectations, our delusions of how life should be, our attachment to a mortal or a thing, or the opposite, our aversions. It is all in our heads. It has nothing to do with the object, it is all us and our mind. In Buddhism, this is the second noble truth.
Now people are just like inanimate objects, but they do form intent, but usually we do not enter into the consideration. We are just moving objects without significance to most others. That is the way we treat many people in the cities where we know few of the surrounding people.
Nature has no intent. It just provides an environment for this opportunistic species, of which we are part, to flourish. There is no plan. Man has created an intent or purpose to develop, a outlet for our natural desires. Directing our desires is man made. Controlling ourselves is good; controlling others leads to resentment, rebellion, resistance, over through, and similar distress.
We need a common goal, often taken to be development of a cosmos, or a flourishing society. Anything that leads to, aids in, supports, sustains, such development is taken as purpose, and is in the right direction.
But what do I know.
Wednesday, September 9, 2015
Clarity
Clarity is the state of resolution when we come to understand. It is the process of realizing we have arrived at our destination, without knowing what our destination was or is. If we do not know where we are going any path will lead there; All we need do is stay on our current path and we will arrive.
It is that moment that we have, late at night, when the brain fog and distraction of the day have gone, when we know what must be done next, why, how, and the like.
I have been examining "wheels of life" to see what areas I could work on, and to reevaluate where I would like to be when I die. and I am more or less there. Marcus Aurelius reminds us that life is a choice. As George Eastman said "My work is done." Now I have time to do an encore, if I desire, or not. I could just keep this place ticking over, and live out the remainder of my life. It is a time of great clarity, and a time of indecision. It does not matter, nature does not care what I do, or do not do.
Coming out as a non-theist has been interesting. Family has all but cut off any incoming contact; it is only me reaching out to them that occurs now. Oh well. Or is it just my bad attitude about some of this other shit that I do not want to know about? Or is it just the dull conversation that I usually go quiet and shut down, or is it just my attitude about sugar, starch, and sugar binges? Oh well.
It is clear to me that I need to get involved in something bigger than myself, that is engaging, has meaning, and a chance of achievement if fate permits. But what? That is the question. It should have a social component, perhaps something education for the youth. Perhaps a bit more archery coaching. I do not know.
It is that moment that we have, late at night, when the brain fog and distraction of the day have gone, when we know what must be done next, why, how, and the like.
I have been examining "wheels of life" to see what areas I could work on, and to reevaluate where I would like to be when I die. and I am more or less there. Marcus Aurelius reminds us that life is a choice. As George Eastman said "My work is done." Now I have time to do an encore, if I desire, or not. I could just keep this place ticking over, and live out the remainder of my life. It is a time of great clarity, and a time of indecision. It does not matter, nature does not care what I do, or do not do.
Coming out as a non-theist has been interesting. Family has all but cut off any incoming contact; it is only me reaching out to them that occurs now. Oh well. Or is it just my bad attitude about some of this other shit that I do not want to know about? Or is it just the dull conversation that I usually go quiet and shut down, or is it just my attitude about sugar, starch, and sugar binges? Oh well.
It is clear to me that I need to get involved in something bigger than myself, that is engaging, has meaning, and a chance of achievement if fate permits. But what? That is the question. It should have a social component, perhaps something education for the youth. Perhaps a bit more archery coaching. I do not know.
Monday, September 7, 2015
Nature
Live in accordance with Nature is the stoic first statement. What does that really mean?
We all have a basic understanding of what nature, the whole of nature is, but what about her rules? Notice that I used the female pronoun to describe nature. She is a bit moody, so that may be appropriate. Nature is the totality of all that is, including man. How is it possible to live not in accordance with nature? We can easily live not in accordance with man's laws, but how about natures'? Can we defy the law of gravity or the attraction of electrons to neutrons? or the laws of chemistry or of biology? Not so much.
The stoic describe a bunch of beliefs that they attribute to nature, and some are hard to agree with, while others are difficult to disagree with. Man has been given desires to reproduce, to eat, to move some, to desire a easier way of life, to think, to desire anything with utility or beauty or novelty. Some feel the pull strongly to some, others to other desires. I have a strong desire to understand the truth, food, and novelty of thought.
Nature does not care what happens. There is no plan beyond that. It is all just a wild biological science experiment, species evolve, those that survive reproduce. Humans have had a mind to adapt the environment to something we can survive in, flourish in, and as a result have populated most regions of the earth, and have overpopulated many regions. Overpopulation is when an area cannot support the number of people living there, either through food supply, economically on in non-compatible belief systems. We have prospered and figured out how to prosper better, how to keep the infirm alive, how to grow the ungifted, and how to support all these through a finical system that is causing wage slaves to think they are free. We can see the deep divisions in our culture, and yet the government will not acknowledge these divisions. Clearing of belief systems is the simple solution to all this strife.
Our beliefs have become an division between we humans. We are Christian or Muslim, Buddhist, Hindi, Tao, or whatever because we were raised that way, and have never looked at our beliefs. It is time we take a look and understand that, and understand that belief is just concepts not real. Nature is all that is real. There are no gods. Those are all human concepts to soften the reality and provide guidance to the next generation. It is not reality. To get along as a flourishing population, we must all cooperate, and become one large 'cosmos' or population. The problem is, I believe, our population has exceeded what the world can support long term. We are due for a major die off.
Flourishing required positive emotion, engagement, meaning, and if nature permits accomplishment. This provides satisfaction, joy and more positive emotion. Religion is not necessary, but is a quick way to train the unconscious automatic mind. It is time to create or revive a belief system based on the rational mind again, as Stoicism was.
The first rule must be that nature is all that is, and if it is not nature, as a belief system, it may be suspect. The study of nature, and all that is natural can go a long way. Things that we can produce from nature may not be suitable for uses as intended. There may be downsides.
How far are we willing to bend to support others? Short term is wildly different than long term. I am not willing to support natives long term, it is time they become self supporting. Same with welfare, not the sick or infirm; we will need to support them until they die off, but the level of support should not be better that we, ourselves live. I live in a small old house because I was raised cheap, frugal, and self sufficient more or less. Most on welfare live better than I do. After the government takes there cut, this is what is left.
But what do I know? God is just a human concept, they do not exist. We need to cooperate to survive.
We all have a basic understanding of what nature, the whole of nature is, but what about her rules? Notice that I used the female pronoun to describe nature. She is a bit moody, so that may be appropriate. Nature is the totality of all that is, including man. How is it possible to live not in accordance with nature? We can easily live not in accordance with man's laws, but how about natures'? Can we defy the law of gravity or the attraction of electrons to neutrons? or the laws of chemistry or of biology? Not so much.
The stoic describe a bunch of beliefs that they attribute to nature, and some are hard to agree with, while others are difficult to disagree with. Man has been given desires to reproduce, to eat, to move some, to desire a easier way of life, to think, to desire anything with utility or beauty or novelty. Some feel the pull strongly to some, others to other desires. I have a strong desire to understand the truth, food, and novelty of thought.
Nature does not care what happens. There is no plan beyond that. It is all just a wild biological science experiment, species evolve, those that survive reproduce. Humans have had a mind to adapt the environment to something we can survive in, flourish in, and as a result have populated most regions of the earth, and have overpopulated many regions. Overpopulation is when an area cannot support the number of people living there, either through food supply, economically on in non-compatible belief systems. We have prospered and figured out how to prosper better, how to keep the infirm alive, how to grow the ungifted, and how to support all these through a finical system that is causing wage slaves to think they are free. We can see the deep divisions in our culture, and yet the government will not acknowledge these divisions. Clearing of belief systems is the simple solution to all this strife.
Our beliefs have become an division between we humans. We are Christian or Muslim, Buddhist, Hindi, Tao, or whatever because we were raised that way, and have never looked at our beliefs. It is time we take a look and understand that, and understand that belief is just concepts not real. Nature is all that is real. There are no gods. Those are all human concepts to soften the reality and provide guidance to the next generation. It is not reality. To get along as a flourishing population, we must all cooperate, and become one large 'cosmos' or population. The problem is, I believe, our population has exceeded what the world can support long term. We are due for a major die off.
Flourishing required positive emotion, engagement, meaning, and if nature permits accomplishment. This provides satisfaction, joy and more positive emotion. Religion is not necessary, but is a quick way to train the unconscious automatic mind. It is time to create or revive a belief system based on the rational mind again, as Stoicism was.
The first rule must be that nature is all that is, and if it is not nature, as a belief system, it may be suspect. The study of nature, and all that is natural can go a long way. Things that we can produce from nature may not be suitable for uses as intended. There may be downsides.
How far are we willing to bend to support others? Short term is wildly different than long term. I am not willing to support natives long term, it is time they become self supporting. Same with welfare, not the sick or infirm; we will need to support them until they die off, but the level of support should not be better that we, ourselves live. I live in a small old house because I was raised cheap, frugal, and self sufficient more or less. Most on welfare live better than I do. After the government takes there cut, this is what is left.
But what do I know? God is just a human concept, they do not exist. We need to cooperate to survive.
Wednesday, September 2, 2015
Coming out as a Nontheist
Religion is for those who cannot handle the truth. Starting at man and nature exist, where does that leave religion? Untruth? A belief system based on some supernatural concept? A comic book? All the religious texts are hear-say, or historical story's which may not be true, but may have shreds of truth interwoven. That is not to say it is all wrong, but there are bits of untruth.... so how do we separate the truth and untruths. It always seems to come down to separating right from story. The story does not matter.
This is the first and only time I am to pass through life and there is no clear instruction book for the non theist. Atheist are against theistism, and I am not against them, I just do not care about them any more. They can believe what ever kind of foolishness they like.
When I look at the likes of Spinoza, who equated god to nature and then talked of god to not offend the religious and did not like to be called an atheist, for that was considered to be offensive. If god is equal to nature, why be obtuse and call it god rather than nature? Nature is real, is easily understood as all that is real and all that is, what is the problem to say it is our nature to seek simplicity, truth and understanding. It is our first time through life; we will make mistakes, so what? Get on with life.
Religion have long been used as the soft approach to life and death. If you cannot handle the fact that one day you will die and be no more, just as it was before you, well religion has an afterlife. Can't handle a deprived and irrational parents? We have religion. No wait, those parents have religion, WTF. Can't handle reality? We have religion and hope. Religion does not teach self sufficiency, learning to live with what is. It teaches to live in dream world, with what might be in a dream state. Surrender to that which we have no control over. Bullshit. We have no control over many things, and we have control over some things. There is no need to surrender to anything that we never had control of, only the delusion of control. The world has run over us one more way; it is just more that is beyond our control.
At death, we end. If we wish to pass something on, we should do it while we are alive, and that should be a truth seeking philosophy. I wish to live in a real world, not a fiction world. Those that wish to entertain and create an imaginary world are welcome to do that, but I will avoid that as much as is possible. That is what I see religion as, as an imaginary world.
As Musonius said, if you want immortality, carve your name into a big rock. That is about the most immortality the average person can hope to achieve. There will be a few that do better at achieving immortality, but that is largely luck, providence, fate, and for a few skill, combined with luck, fate, the times, events, etc.
Bullies bully, that is there nature. Many religions are bullies, and use bulling tactics, ostracization. (How christian is that.) Bullies do not like to bleed. We can verbally attach them. We can use truth against them. We can use their beliefs against them, but wait, they do not believe strongly and only when it is convenient. They are not into self reflection except through there rose colored filters, so that is pointless. It is just best to ignore the religious and carry on. What is important is to teach the children truth, and the next generation will be on the right track.
Social skill are important for civilization, and I am concerned that all this electronic communication and isolation are eroding the skills of some, just as the isolation imposed of some in the past has caused slow development and social anxiety, as it is now described. But is it social anxiety, or is it just silence to the noise of bullshit. Ignore the noise and pass through without needing to sort out any truths is the path of least resistance.
But what do I know?
This is the first and only time I am to pass through life and there is no clear instruction book for the non theist. Atheist are against theistism, and I am not against them, I just do not care about them any more. They can believe what ever kind of foolishness they like.
When I look at the likes of Spinoza, who equated god to nature and then talked of god to not offend the religious and did not like to be called an atheist, for that was considered to be offensive. If god is equal to nature, why be obtuse and call it god rather than nature? Nature is real, is easily understood as all that is real and all that is, what is the problem to say it is our nature to seek simplicity, truth and understanding. It is our first time through life; we will make mistakes, so what? Get on with life.
Religion have long been used as the soft approach to life and death. If you cannot handle the fact that one day you will die and be no more, just as it was before you, well religion has an afterlife. Can't handle a deprived and irrational parents? We have religion. No wait, those parents have religion, WTF. Can't handle reality? We have religion and hope. Religion does not teach self sufficiency, learning to live with what is. It teaches to live in dream world, with what might be in a dream state. Surrender to that which we have no control over. Bullshit. We have no control over many things, and we have control over some things. There is no need to surrender to anything that we never had control of, only the delusion of control. The world has run over us one more way; it is just more that is beyond our control.
At death, we end. If we wish to pass something on, we should do it while we are alive, and that should be a truth seeking philosophy. I wish to live in a real world, not a fiction world. Those that wish to entertain and create an imaginary world are welcome to do that, but I will avoid that as much as is possible. That is what I see religion as, as an imaginary world.
As Musonius said, if you want immortality, carve your name into a big rock. That is about the most immortality the average person can hope to achieve. There will be a few that do better at achieving immortality, but that is largely luck, providence, fate, and for a few skill, combined with luck, fate, the times, events, etc.
Bullies bully, that is there nature. Many religions are bullies, and use bulling tactics, ostracization. (How christian is that.) Bullies do not like to bleed. We can verbally attach them. We can use truth against them. We can use their beliefs against them, but wait, they do not believe strongly and only when it is convenient. They are not into self reflection except through there rose colored filters, so that is pointless. It is just best to ignore the religious and carry on. What is important is to teach the children truth, and the next generation will be on the right track.
Social skill are important for civilization, and I am concerned that all this electronic communication and isolation are eroding the skills of some, just as the isolation imposed of some in the past has caused slow development and social anxiety, as it is now described. But is it social anxiety, or is it just silence to the noise of bullshit. Ignore the noise and pass through without needing to sort out any truths is the path of least resistance.
But what do I know?
Tuesday, September 1, 2015
Reconstruction - coming out as an atheist or nontheist
There is no god, just man and nature. Accept that, if you can. It is not a belief, but rather an non-acceptance of other people's beliefs or concepts. Along the way other logic must be placed in where previous concepts existed.
In the ongoing change process, it has become evident that man is real, nature is real and religion is not real, and is therefore bullshit. These videos raise some questions that Marcus Aurelius answers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_d-Ejj0y3o
http://www.rzim.eu/the-scandanavian-sceptic-or-why-atheism-is-a-belief-system
The first is what is our purpose on this big rock. Purpose is a man made concept. We can ask the question, but that does not mean it has a true answer. Nature is not forward looking beyond giving us each the desire to survive and reproduce. Marcus says lesser species are here to serve the upper, and man is here to serve man. We do better if we work together for the common goal of survival. Some of us do not like freeloaders, and we wish to give our offspring a advantage. Others just want to reproduce, and not take responsibility for there offspring. It is all just a numbers game, good offspring with a potentially good start in life, v. many offspring.
Morals is one area the religions claim to have superiority over, but that is untrue. It is just right to do right. Do to others and you would like to be done to also goes a long way.
Truth is the first fundamental of life. So if there is no god, how truthful is religion. If there is a god, it is up to them to prove it, for it is logically impossible to prove that something does not exist. Non belief does not require proof.
Being an atheist in this time is difficult. Family will stop calling, and some friends will avoid you and me. Oh well. It is difficult to listen to some religious people with there concepts of afterlife, hope, doing good for a later reward and the like. The big one is that earth was created for humans... bullshit. Earth happened, it was suitable for life and humans evolved and flourished. It is all about a flourishing population, without a purpose. But we humans need to apply a purpose, a reason for everything, and the most fundamental of beliefs must be true to flourish.
We humans are about 7.5 billion strong today. Somewhere between 100 and 115 billion of us have existed and returned to the recycle carbon system. Oh well, does it all matter?
In the ongoing change process, it has become evident that man is real, nature is real and religion is not real, and is therefore bullshit. These videos raise some questions that Marcus Aurelius answers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_d-Ejj0y3o
http://www.rzim.eu/the-scandanavian-sceptic-or-why-atheism-is-a-belief-system
The first is what is our purpose on this big rock. Purpose is a man made concept. We can ask the question, but that does not mean it has a true answer. Nature is not forward looking beyond giving us each the desire to survive and reproduce. Marcus says lesser species are here to serve the upper, and man is here to serve man. We do better if we work together for the common goal of survival. Some of us do not like freeloaders, and we wish to give our offspring a advantage. Others just want to reproduce, and not take responsibility for there offspring. It is all just a numbers game, good offspring with a potentially good start in life, v. many offspring.
Morals is one area the religions claim to have superiority over, but that is untrue. It is just right to do right. Do to others and you would like to be done to also goes a long way.
Truth is the first fundamental of life. So if there is no god, how truthful is religion. If there is a god, it is up to them to prove it, for it is logically impossible to prove that something does not exist. Non belief does not require proof.
Being an atheist in this time is difficult. Family will stop calling, and some friends will avoid you and me. Oh well. It is difficult to listen to some religious people with there concepts of afterlife, hope, doing good for a later reward and the like. The big one is that earth was created for humans... bullshit. Earth happened, it was suitable for life and humans evolved and flourished. It is all about a flourishing population, without a purpose. But we humans need to apply a purpose, a reason for everything, and the most fundamental of beliefs must be true to flourish.
We humans are about 7.5 billion strong today. Somewhere between 100 and 115 billion of us have existed and returned to the recycle carbon system. Oh well, does it all matter?
Monday, August 31, 2015
ISIS or ISIL
How do we defeat the radical group? That is the ultimate question. I think one of the answers in the deprogramming of religion, and removal of the effect of religion. We cannot do this to just one religion, we need to do it to all religions. Morals are a separate problem, along with public behavior and driving curacy.
Deprogramming is a fancy concept for learning to understand that which is, and is real, and that which is not so physically real. It is separating real from concepts, provable concepts from those which are less provable. It is illogical to try to prove something does not exist. It is logical to assume the non existence of the un-provable and if evidence or demonstration can be made then maybe.
What do we know exists? Man and nature for sure. Physical mater, the laws of nature, and all such things can be felt, seen, or can be demonstrate to exist as forces, and the like, but because we can feel things, in a non physical sense, does not mean they exist. Consider a god, any god. There is no evidence that they exist, or ever existed. We apply purpose on everything nature does, but purpose only exists in the minds of men. When something comes into being, man will find a purpose for it or not. It does not matter. Nothing in nature has any planning, planning is another man made concept. It causes expectations and delusion of how life should be.
Ideas, concepts may exist or subsist, but are they true? Well each needs to be tested in current time. How do we test moral laws. First, what if it was done to us? Imposing an ideology on someone is not right. Trying to prove a point by logic is less offense, but it is difficult to change the mind of who will not listen. Showing them the logic is the only logical way, but there are the emotional among us who's eyes glaze over at a<b therefore b>a.
Openly secular.org http://openlysecular.org/
Man exist. Nature exists. Gods are bullshit, as are religions. But what do I know?
Deprogramming is a fancy concept for learning to understand that which is, and is real, and that which is not so physically real. It is separating real from concepts, provable concepts from those which are less provable. It is illogical to try to prove something does not exist. It is logical to assume the non existence of the un-provable and if evidence or demonstration can be made then maybe.
What do we know exists? Man and nature for sure. Physical mater, the laws of nature, and all such things can be felt, seen, or can be demonstrate to exist as forces, and the like, but because we can feel things, in a non physical sense, does not mean they exist. Consider a god, any god. There is no evidence that they exist, or ever existed. We apply purpose on everything nature does, but purpose only exists in the minds of men. When something comes into being, man will find a purpose for it or not. It does not matter. Nothing in nature has any planning, planning is another man made concept. It causes expectations and delusion of how life should be.
Ideas, concepts may exist or subsist, but are they true? Well each needs to be tested in current time. How do we test moral laws. First, what if it was done to us? Imposing an ideology on someone is not right. Trying to prove a point by logic is less offense, but it is difficult to change the mind of who will not listen. Showing them the logic is the only logical way, but there are the emotional among us who's eyes glaze over at a<b therefore b>a.
Openly secular.org http://openlysecular.org/
Man exist. Nature exists. Gods are bullshit, as are religions. But what do I know?
Friday, August 21, 2015
Stoic Philosophy and Locus of Control
First a touch of humor: DoFo for PM
http://www.threeminutetherapy.com/index.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXXJVj-GmzE&feature=youtu.be
The above video got me thinking, we can shift our locus of control internal or to the external if it does not work where it is.
Epictetus said "some things are within our control, some are not". Those things within our control are our judgements, opinions, motivation to act, desires, and by extensions our beliefs, values, and all those mental actions. This is of course limited by reality of nature, our ability and the like. This is totally rational. Those things outside of our control, our bodies, the economy, even the consequences of our actions are just out of our control. Other may wish to make us responsible, but responsibility is not the same as control.
Locus of control is only looking at whether the function in question is internal or external. If in fact we have no control, then it must be external. Others may wish to make it our responsibility, and even try to say that we are in control, but I call bullshit on that. If our physical body has a craving, and we are unable to resist, it may be that the body has too much influence. Perhaps we need to understand that we need a bit of unprocessed carbohydrates on a regular basis to relieve the physical need. Perhaps we allow over indulgence, and that is within our control.
How does one differentiate between a craving and a physical need? Well, needs do not go away, while cravings do. Cravings are both physical and mental, while needs are physical, as viewed through the primitive part of the brain. But then so are cravings. When I try very low carb, I crave carbs, or do I need carbs? When I meter a few carbs in, that need/craving is manageable, so is it a need or a craving?
Clearly, only that which is within our control can be under internal locus of control. It is those things like our beliefs and values that could be externally controlled, or were externally controlled in our youth. The real question is have we taken control of our beliefs or do we allow our subconscious to govern, that is to say what we learned from external sources, what we continued to echo, and may be still echoing? That is not to say those beliefs and values are wrong, but until we question them, we do not know if they are appropriate for the present time.
Trust is a value that can serve as a big example. In the time when we knew everyone we dealt with, where travel was difficult, we knew the neighbors, and were in a stable environment, perhaps the default was appropriately to trust until the trust is broken. Once trust is broken, our interactions become conditional. Now the default, at least on the internet is to trust no one. That takes care of the scams. It is all a scam until demonstrated that it is not. Look at it and examine it, test it, and if it holds water, perhaps use it. Be prepared to let it all go for it may be bullshit. Consider religion. All man made, some truth, but mostly story of no intrinsic value. Some values are good, but no caution nor evidence of the fundamental underlying assumptions.
In the Ashley Madison data, it has been suggest that over 80% are just profiles, and less than 20% are real, or have "real" people behind the profile. In the females, this number may be 95/05. So what is real anyway, when it comes to the internet?
Now back to the locus, if it is ours to control, we had best make it internal if we are rationals, and if we are just drifting through life as we always have done, either will work to a point. Now if we have a problem we can either address the problem or plaster over it as with a 12 step program and ignore the problem and perhaps it will just go away or not.
Event, beliefs, reaction. The event does not cause the reaction alone. It is the beliefs that cause us to react. Change our beliefs and we can change our reactions.
But then what do I know?
http://www.threeminutetherapy.com/index.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXXJVj-GmzE&feature=youtu.be
The above video got me thinking, we can shift our locus of control internal or to the external if it does not work where it is.
Epictetus said "some things are within our control, some are not". Those things within our control are our judgements, opinions, motivation to act, desires, and by extensions our beliefs, values, and all those mental actions. This is of course limited by reality of nature, our ability and the like. This is totally rational. Those things outside of our control, our bodies, the economy, even the consequences of our actions are just out of our control. Other may wish to make us responsible, but responsibility is not the same as control.
Locus of control is only looking at whether the function in question is internal or external. If in fact we have no control, then it must be external. Others may wish to make it our responsibility, and even try to say that we are in control, but I call bullshit on that. If our physical body has a craving, and we are unable to resist, it may be that the body has too much influence. Perhaps we need to understand that we need a bit of unprocessed carbohydrates on a regular basis to relieve the physical need. Perhaps we allow over indulgence, and that is within our control.
How does one differentiate between a craving and a physical need? Well, needs do not go away, while cravings do. Cravings are both physical and mental, while needs are physical, as viewed through the primitive part of the brain. But then so are cravings. When I try very low carb, I crave carbs, or do I need carbs? When I meter a few carbs in, that need/craving is manageable, so is it a need or a craving?
Clearly, only that which is within our control can be under internal locus of control. It is those things like our beliefs and values that could be externally controlled, or were externally controlled in our youth. The real question is have we taken control of our beliefs or do we allow our subconscious to govern, that is to say what we learned from external sources, what we continued to echo, and may be still echoing? That is not to say those beliefs and values are wrong, but until we question them, we do not know if they are appropriate for the present time.
Trust is a value that can serve as a big example. In the time when we knew everyone we dealt with, where travel was difficult, we knew the neighbors, and were in a stable environment, perhaps the default was appropriately to trust until the trust is broken. Once trust is broken, our interactions become conditional. Now the default, at least on the internet is to trust no one. That takes care of the scams. It is all a scam until demonstrated that it is not. Look at it and examine it, test it, and if it holds water, perhaps use it. Be prepared to let it all go for it may be bullshit. Consider religion. All man made, some truth, but mostly story of no intrinsic value. Some values are good, but no caution nor evidence of the fundamental underlying assumptions.
In the Ashley Madison data, it has been suggest that over 80% are just profiles, and less than 20% are real, or have "real" people behind the profile. In the females, this number may be 95/05. So what is real anyway, when it comes to the internet?
Now back to the locus, if it is ours to control, we had best make it internal if we are rationals, and if we are just drifting through life as we always have done, either will work to a point. Now if we have a problem we can either address the problem or plaster over it as with a 12 step program and ignore the problem and perhaps it will just go away or not.
Event, beliefs, reaction. The event does not cause the reaction alone. It is the beliefs that cause us to react. Change our beliefs and we can change our reactions.
But then what do I know?
Sunday, August 16, 2015
What exists?
We know man exists, and that nature exists. The physical and chemical world exists. What events are not explained by the actions of either of these two? Nothing; therefore, there is no need of a god.
Man created god to explain that which we did not understand. Oh well. Sometimes time, the bugs, germs, fungus, cancers, deterioration or other thing overcome human life. Other times it is vermin that gets us or vermin of another sort if you dabble in the drug industry. Oh well, the planet will survive. Even if man does not, the earth will survive or not. It will not matter to a living person at that time.
Religions frequently allude the world being here for our benefit. That is bullshit way of expressing how important we thing we human are. The world developed out of physical and chemical environment, and life evolved. All life is opportunistic, even plants, and will grow, spread, and reproduce where it can. Some will adapt to grow in what was marginal conditions. Evolution, as it continues today, is the best explanation, and seems to be a natural law, part of the logos, if you prefer. Words are such poor pointers to the concept that it is not fully described in the public lexicon; it maybe in some academic circles, but has not reached the public memes.
We have those vege philosophers that say we should not eat animals because it is wrong to kill, but try eating a turnip without killing it. Plant life is life also, just not animated. Oh, well, we are a opportunistic species, in fact can anyone name one who is not? That is another part of the logos or natural laws.
So do concepts exist? Stoics said these subsist, as a special case of existence. These concepts can be false, yet cause humans to act. Perhaps existence is the wrong property to apply to concepts, but rather consider them to be something like a computer program running on a machine, an organic carbon based computer with leaky memory, sloppy error trapping, random generation from biased seed, and faulty logic. To save time and energy, a look up table of previous decisions, complete with errors, are used much of the time. It also generates strong and non-rational passions that go around causing problems.
Our rational minds exist, but are seldom in control beyond learned functions. Is there a way to learn rational behaviors that we typically leave up to our unconscious mind? That is to say, a way of maintaining rational control all of the time?
That would mean nothing is done without purpose, and only with purpose does anything happen. If that we the case, with so many humans, the world would be cationic, unpredictable, just as it is.
How could we separate that which happens with an intended purpose and that which happens as a result of the unforeseen?
And once it happens, it is real and history and cannot be changed therefore we must accept it.
It is like the "you can be anything you want to be" psychobabble. Those things are like religions (all man made), just ain't so. These are things which just do not exist in a real sense, but just live on in the minds of men as memes.
But then what do I know?
Man created god to explain that which we did not understand. Oh well. Sometimes time, the bugs, germs, fungus, cancers, deterioration or other thing overcome human life. Other times it is vermin that gets us or vermin of another sort if you dabble in the drug industry. Oh well, the planet will survive. Even if man does not, the earth will survive or not. It will not matter to a living person at that time.
Religions frequently allude the world being here for our benefit. That is bullshit way of expressing how important we thing we human are. The world developed out of physical and chemical environment, and life evolved. All life is opportunistic, even plants, and will grow, spread, and reproduce where it can. Some will adapt to grow in what was marginal conditions. Evolution, as it continues today, is the best explanation, and seems to be a natural law, part of the logos, if you prefer. Words are such poor pointers to the concept that it is not fully described in the public lexicon; it maybe in some academic circles, but has not reached the public memes.
We have those vege philosophers that say we should not eat animals because it is wrong to kill, but try eating a turnip without killing it. Plant life is life also, just not animated. Oh, well, we are a opportunistic species, in fact can anyone name one who is not? That is another part of the logos or natural laws.
So do concepts exist? Stoics said these subsist, as a special case of existence. These concepts can be false, yet cause humans to act. Perhaps existence is the wrong property to apply to concepts, but rather consider them to be something like a computer program running on a machine, an organic carbon based computer with leaky memory, sloppy error trapping, random generation from biased seed, and faulty logic. To save time and energy, a look up table of previous decisions, complete with errors, are used much of the time. It also generates strong and non-rational passions that go around causing problems.
Our rational minds exist, but are seldom in control beyond learned functions. Is there a way to learn rational behaviors that we typically leave up to our unconscious mind? That is to say, a way of maintaining rational control all of the time?
That would mean nothing is done without purpose, and only with purpose does anything happen. If that we the case, with so many humans, the world would be cationic, unpredictable, just as it is.
How could we separate that which happens with an intended purpose and that which happens as a result of the unforeseen?
And once it happens, it is real and history and cannot be changed therefore we must accept it.
It is like the "you can be anything you want to be" psychobabble. Those things are like religions (all man made), just ain't so. These are things which just do not exist in a real sense, but just live on in the minds of men as memes.
But then what do I know?
Friday, August 14, 2015
To OA
I am taking a brake from F2F meetings. I found the last one I was
at to be "disturbing and dangerous". Too much man hatred in the
room. I felt in danger, and decided that the program may be
attracting the crazy ladies that need substantial help, and I do
not need that in my life today. That forced me to re-evaluate what
the program offers.
I have struggled long to become a rational person with generally rational behaviors, within that I can physically do, and I think now that becoming even more rational is the key to recovery. "Do nothing, not even eat, without a rational purpose." Continuing to go to meeting habitually, where I am the most recovered person and in need of more recovery, is just not productive, especially where a group developed and some of the people are negative, highly emotional and unhinged.
The meetings provide an "extended social network of like minded people"; however, I am also drifting from that like minded concept to a more detailed concrete concept of reality and have never been better than today.
Also the understanding of this disease or overeating behavior has extended far beyond what it was when the AA program was adapted, and far beyond what is talked about in the program. The program, for me, may have reached the point of being counterproductive for my continued development of overcoming this overeating behavior. So for this while I have been exploring alternate methods of changing overeating behaviors, the causes and corrections. It has been an eye opening process, and I have seen considerable change in myself.
I fear the program is also distracting the primarily highly rational people from finding the cure, but does provide a disease based model for treatment for the primarily emotional, subconscious, and low rational based people. The program does not cure the behavior, rather manages the "disease". It is the cure of the behavior that I now seek to correct, and believe I have found the cause and cure of this overeating behavior.
Again thank you for your concern. If I can offer you any help with your recovery, please advise.
I have struggled long to become a rational person with generally rational behaviors, within that I can physically do, and I think now that becoming even more rational is the key to recovery. "Do nothing, not even eat, without a rational purpose." Continuing to go to meeting habitually, where I am the most recovered person and in need of more recovery, is just not productive, especially where a group developed and some of the people are negative, highly emotional and unhinged.
The meetings provide an "extended social network of like minded people"; however, I am also drifting from that like minded concept to a more detailed concrete concept of reality and have never been better than today.
Also the understanding of this disease or overeating behavior has extended far beyond what it was when the AA program was adapted, and far beyond what is talked about in the program. The program, for me, may have reached the point of being counterproductive for my continued development of overcoming this overeating behavior. So for this while I have been exploring alternate methods of changing overeating behaviors, the causes and corrections. It has been an eye opening process, and I have seen considerable change in myself.
I fear the program is also distracting the primarily highly rational people from finding the cure, but does provide a disease based model for treatment for the primarily emotional, subconscious, and low rational based people. The program does not cure the behavior, rather manages the "disease". It is the cure of the behavior that I now seek to correct, and believe I have found the cause and cure of this overeating behavior.
Again thank you for your concern. If I can offer you any help with your recovery, please advise.
Sunday, August 2, 2015
Effects of life in a delusion
What effect did growing up in a delusion have on me, and by extension, what effect does it have on others who have not yet seen that they are living in a delusion?
So there are two related problems, one living under a control freak, and secondly under a deluded religious control freak.
What delusion? Well I grew up under a religious control freak, and I now realize that that was not healthy and is environment is not healthy to grow up in. Myths like gods, and religion should be eliminated. Youths need sound morals, sound logic, sound directions to plan a life at the same time allow passion for life to develop. Children are mortal, and some will be returned to where they came from, we must accept this, as it is the natural way. We must allow this to occur. We must learn to let go. It is health to do so.
Religions are run by man today. Going backward in time, we can see that in each generation, religions have been run by there generation of church elders, back to when the church or religion split off there ancestral religion. So in the beginning, additional myths or non-understood events were added to the population lour of the time and passed down. In the beginning of religion there was nature and there was man, as we had evolved to that point. Evolution carries on today, at about the same speed as before. That has not changed. We are animals carrying a brain. Nothing more. Our highest good would be to use logic, which is our directing brains main function, to advance society in some way. To do this well, we need to cooperate, and to live peacefully, to develop, expand or abilities, and most importantly, our knowledge.
Some of what we currently "know" is just wrong, and some of what we learn will also be wrong, and will later need to be replaced with "more right" knowledge. We frequently use mathematics and logic to model our knowledge (beliefs) and when these fail, we must be willing to let go of the delusions that were created. We frequently care other delusions, such as how life should be, but these are just delusions as well. Some will partly come true, most will not, so what?
Obesity is caused by overeating, mainly carbohydrates, and overeating causes the desire to overeat through a internal insulin - glucagon - glucose cycle, and there are at least five other groups of causes: physical, environmental, maladaptive behaviors, food knowledge, and food addiction. Until we get rid of all our delusions, we can live a free modern animals that we are and support or big brain. The god delusion is one of the big delusions to kick out.
The second is that our expectations can be forced onto children. Children must learn their own expectations, and develop the passion to go after their own expectations.I have seen time and again children with no expressed desire to do and achieve; I was one for many years. It is not good; children with expectations, and secondly a plan to get there, with the passion to see it through are the goal. The expectation, plan, and passion cannot be forced or directed very much; it must come from the inside, and likely for many may not be discovered in early life.
The best first step is to get rid of all delusions, expectations beyond our own control, and do a evaluation of our strengths and weaknesses as far as native skills. Use our native skills to our advantage. If we are not writers, do not stress over it, only write as necessary and then only when we have something to say. I hated writing reports as an engineer, but that has been my major product for most of my professional career. I enjoyed getting the information together to produce the report more, but without knowing how to right and write the report, there often would not be a solution. The client may not like the cost of some of my solutions, but then that is beyond my control.
So there are two related problems, one living under a control freak, and secondly under a deluded religious control freak.
What delusion? Well I grew up under a religious control freak, and I now realize that that was not healthy and is environment is not healthy to grow up in. Myths like gods, and religion should be eliminated. Youths need sound morals, sound logic, sound directions to plan a life at the same time allow passion for life to develop. Children are mortal, and some will be returned to where they came from, we must accept this, as it is the natural way. We must allow this to occur. We must learn to let go. It is health to do so.
Religions are run by man today. Going backward in time, we can see that in each generation, religions have been run by there generation of church elders, back to when the church or religion split off there ancestral religion. So in the beginning, additional myths or non-understood events were added to the population lour of the time and passed down. In the beginning of religion there was nature and there was man, as we had evolved to that point. Evolution carries on today, at about the same speed as before. That has not changed. We are animals carrying a brain. Nothing more. Our highest good would be to use logic, which is our directing brains main function, to advance society in some way. To do this well, we need to cooperate, and to live peacefully, to develop, expand or abilities, and most importantly, our knowledge.
Some of what we currently "know" is just wrong, and some of what we learn will also be wrong, and will later need to be replaced with "more right" knowledge. We frequently use mathematics and logic to model our knowledge (beliefs) and when these fail, we must be willing to let go of the delusions that were created. We frequently care other delusions, such as how life should be, but these are just delusions as well. Some will partly come true, most will not, so what?
Obesity is caused by overeating, mainly carbohydrates, and overeating causes the desire to overeat through a internal insulin - glucagon - glucose cycle, and there are at least five other groups of causes: physical, environmental, maladaptive behaviors, food knowledge, and food addiction. Until we get rid of all our delusions, we can live a free modern animals that we are and support or big brain. The god delusion is one of the big delusions to kick out.
The second is that our expectations can be forced onto children. Children must learn their own expectations, and develop the passion to go after their own expectations.I have seen time and again children with no expressed desire to do and achieve; I was one for many years. It is not good; children with expectations, and secondly a plan to get there, with the passion to see it through are the goal. The expectation, plan, and passion cannot be forced or directed very much; it must come from the inside, and likely for many may not be discovered in early life.
The best first step is to get rid of all delusions, expectations beyond our own control, and do a evaluation of our strengths and weaknesses as far as native skills. Use our native skills to our advantage. If we are not writers, do not stress over it, only write as necessary and then only when we have something to say. I hated writing reports as an engineer, but that has been my major product for most of my professional career. I enjoyed getting the information together to produce the report more, but without knowing how to right and write the report, there often would not be a solution. The client may not like the cost of some of my solutions, but then that is beyond my control.
Saturday, July 25, 2015
Biological Momentum vs rant
Biological momentum, could that be a suitable term for the force that drives biological life forward? The force behind evolution, growth, and even the desire to eat, aka appetite? Is the desire to eat/overeat a natural force just run amok in this time of excess entertainment, low human physical energy demand, high numbers of sitting/thinking/writing jobs. Jobs? Occupations? Endeavors?
stimulated from http://aaagnostica.org/2015/07/26/rewriting-the-12-steps-for-atheists/
When a new religion comes to town, people of old listened and heard a bit. They likely adopted a few of the memes that were loaded on their existing cultural belief system. It built up into what we see today. This evolution by district demonstrates the differences we see in religions and cultures we see today. Consider Islam and its capacity to violence from the middle east, or Islam and female mutilation from middle Africa. The hatred for blacks in the US. The dislike of new immigrants and natives in Canada. It is the combination of culture and religion that is the resultant belief and behavioral system. Deletion of parts of our existing belief system, or over writing are not so easy. We may even know that it iswrong socially unacceptable, but yet we believe.
I have known that religion, as it is currently, is man made. Man has adapted the prevailing culture by adding a few beliefs at a time since the beginning of agriculture at least. I take the concept that, in the beginning, god was used as surrogate for nature which they did not understand, and man therefore created god, but nature exists, along with all the laws of nature and forces. This is essentially the Spinoza final view but with my derivation.
Man created the 12 steps, and as such these steps point crudely to an underlying principal. Step one points, I think, to the fact that some things are within our power, and some are not. Within our power are our opinions, motivation, desires, aversions, beliefs; those things totally within our minds, and all else is outside of our direct control. We only have influence at best. Our development can start once we have a clear mental separation between ourselves and our environment. We are in the process of learning all of our lives. It is just what we are learning that is up for debate.
I think, therefore; that there is no need of a god, but at the same time we cannot deny nature. The scientific solution may then be to understand nature and follow what is reasonable. We also must understand that nature generates many false leads to produce the random trials that produce evolution. We with reason, can see when we are on a path that leads to self destruction of one form or another. We can then reasonable, choose to leave the self destruction and direct our efforts in better directions, but regardless of what happens, nature is in charge; of that there can be no doubt.
Faith, hope and charity are all just fine but these are distractions from actions, which can make a difference. We are all subject to the winds of nature; whether we consider these fate or the more positive providence. Positive Psychology is partly right at least.
stimulated from http://aaagnostica.org/2015/07/26/rewriting-the-12-steps-for-atheists/
When a new religion comes to town, people of old listened and heard a bit. They likely adopted a few of the memes that were loaded on their existing cultural belief system. It built up into what we see today. This evolution by district demonstrates the differences we see in religions and cultures we see today. Consider Islam and its capacity to violence from the middle east, or Islam and female mutilation from middle Africa. The hatred for blacks in the US. The dislike of new immigrants and natives in Canada. It is the combination of culture and religion that is the resultant belief and behavioral system. Deletion of parts of our existing belief system, or over writing are not so easy. We may even know that it is
I have known that religion, as it is currently, is man made. Man has adapted the prevailing culture by adding a few beliefs at a time since the beginning of agriculture at least. I take the concept that, in the beginning, god was used as surrogate for nature which they did not understand, and man therefore created god, but nature exists, along with all the laws of nature and forces. This is essentially the Spinoza final view but with my derivation.
Man created the 12 steps, and as such these steps point crudely to an underlying principal. Step one points, I think, to the fact that some things are within our power, and some are not. Within our power are our opinions, motivation, desires, aversions, beliefs; those things totally within our minds, and all else is outside of our direct control. We only have influence at best. Our development can start once we have a clear mental separation between ourselves and our environment. We are in the process of learning all of our lives. It is just what we are learning that is up for debate.
I think, therefore; that there is no need of a god, but at the same time we cannot deny nature. The scientific solution may then be to understand nature and follow what is reasonable. We also must understand that nature generates many false leads to produce the random trials that produce evolution. We with reason, can see when we are on a path that leads to self destruction of one form or another. We can then reasonable, choose to leave the self destruction and direct our efforts in better directions, but regardless of what happens, nature is in charge; of that there can be no doubt.
Faith, hope and charity are all just fine but these are distractions from actions, which can make a difference. We are all subject to the winds of nature; whether we consider these fate or the more positive providence. Positive Psychology is partly right at least.
What do we call the force that drives us forward?
What do we call the force that drives us forward?
Empathy is the capacity to understand or feel what another person is experiencing from within the other person's frame of reference, i.e., the capacity to place oneself in another's shoes.
and in thermodynamics:
In thermodynamics, entropy (usual symbol S) is a measure of the number of specific ways in which a thermodynamic system may be arranged, commonly understood as a measure of disorder.
momentum
but what is the force called?
Willpower? Time? Knowledge? Understanding? Motivation?
Empathy is the capacity to understand or feel what another person is experiencing from within the other person's frame of reference, i.e., the capacity to place oneself in another's shoes.
and in thermodynamics:
noun: enthalpy; plural noun: enthalpies; symbol: H
- a thermodynamic quantity equivalent to the total heat content of a system. It is equal to the internal energy of the system plus the product of pressure and volume.
- the change in enthalpy associated with a particular chemical proces
In thermodynamics, entropy (usual symbol S) is a measure of the number of specific ways in which a thermodynamic system may be arranged, commonly understood as a measure of disorder.
momentum
: the strength or force that something has when it is moving
: the strength or force that allows something to continue or to grow stronger or faster as time passes
: the strength or force that allows something to continue or to grow stronger or faster as time passes
physics : the property that a moving object has due to its mass and its motion
def 1
:
a property of a moving body that the body has by virtue of its mass and
motion and that is equal to the product of the body's mass and
velocity; broadly : a property of a moving
body that determines the length of time required to bring it to rest
when under the action of a constant force or moment
2
: strength or force gained by motion or by a series of events
So are we confused yet?
Flourishing: Health and well-being are the force that drive successful life. (note: PP states that positive emotion, engagement, meaning, action, achievement, satisfaction, joy, positive emotion... is the cycle forward.)
Willpower? Time? Knowledge? Understanding? Motivation?
Is there a force? I can feel it at times. Like gravity, yet it must be biological. It appears to be natural and have existed since the time the first H+ joined with Carbon. It is the biological equivalent of electronic attraction of negative and positive ions. It is and when it gets the opportunity, it happens.
Saturday, July 18, 2015
Religions are man made
Religions are man made. Why are we listening so intently to the preaching of the long dead? Why do we think they knew more than we do?
Next, if religion is man made, why not gods on which these religions are based?
Just the questions, we each need to work out our own answers.
Next, if religion is man made, why not gods on which these religions are based?
Just the questions, we each need to work out our own answers.
Wednesday, July 8, 2015
Redirection of our Narrative
Timothy D Wilson and his book Redirect is an interesting read, but changing our narrative only goes so far. We are not in life by ourselves, we are not a island. We have dependents, or are dependents with ongoing finical and family obligations. Now what happens to redirection, we can change our thinking and our outlook, but we live in a real situation, and that can turn nasty quickly. The ease way may be to continue without much change outwardly, yet the real problem may be external. The problems also have a order that must be dealt with.
I would bet that anyone more than 100 pounds overweight is dealing with food addiction, and further it is likely sugar and wheat based carbohydrates, or other processed carbohydrates. As the range of overweight reduces, addiction is less common, based on my observations. Maladaptive behaviors where eating is the maladaptations would be next. This includes stress, anxiety, indecision, frustration, no logical choice, trapped in abusive situations, living under a control freak, etc. We may not know how to deal with the causes of stress, anxiety, or whatever. Eating may be the best solution, keep you head down until you can escape the oppressor. Overeating is a relaxant, and that may be the only way through the dilemma we face. These can be difficult to deal with, and may occur together with addiction. Food knowledge, habit, physical drives to eat, environmental issues may also need to be dealt with also.
Knowing that our story, and that which we grew up in is all just narrative is a useful tool for self management, but we still need to live by our virtues and within the reality that we are in. We can not pull a Greese and decide to not pay our debts or impound money on deposit, and then wonder why foreign investment just dried up. We do need to take a look at our cultural narrative and adjust that going forward.
a picture for those who need to think cool thoughts
I would bet that anyone more than 100 pounds overweight is dealing with food addiction, and further it is likely sugar and wheat based carbohydrates, or other processed carbohydrates. As the range of overweight reduces, addiction is less common, based on my observations. Maladaptive behaviors where eating is the maladaptations would be next. This includes stress, anxiety, indecision, frustration, no logical choice, trapped in abusive situations, living under a control freak, etc. We may not know how to deal with the causes of stress, anxiety, or whatever. Eating may be the best solution, keep you head down until you can escape the oppressor. Overeating is a relaxant, and that may be the only way through the dilemma we face. These can be difficult to deal with, and may occur together with addiction. Food knowledge, habit, physical drives to eat, environmental issues may also need to be dealt with also.
Knowing that our story, and that which we grew up in is all just narrative is a useful tool for self management, but we still need to live by our virtues and within the reality that we are in. We can not pull a Greese and decide to not pay our debts or impound money on deposit, and then wonder why foreign investment just dried up. We do need to take a look at our cultural narrative and adjust that going forward.
a picture for those who need to think cool thoughts
 |
| snow overhang |
Wednesday, July 1, 2015
Narrative Overlays
Narrative Overlays
We are born into our culture a blank slate. We learn and are taught a country, culture, religion, time, narrative. We are trained for some career(s) and continue in that narrative. We may change country's, by choice or chance, or by family decision. Again, none of this is inherently right or wrong, rather it is all narrative or story. Now we can evaluate all that narrative and through out that which does not fit, currently, culturally, personality, likes, dislikes. It does not matter, it is all meaningless, and without purpose beyond producing a next generation, and hopefully leaving the world in a better place, but we need only replacement population, not growth.
This growth in thinking is virtue, and the rules of society. The Government of Canada, in their infinite wisdom has made a decree that we shall not be raciest, misogynistic, homophobic, etc, etc. Bullshit, they cannot control what I think, only make it illegal to express my feelings. It is permitted to dislike individuals but not groups... Ya sure... We need a word to describe this... Govorrment decree. ( Ukrainian pronunciation)
The fist thing we must recognize is that there is a force in the world that is not visible, but drives us forward, causes life to grow, to reproduce, causes desire, drives us to eat, to act, to think. If there is a god of any kind it is that force, but since we can feel it we could name it the god force, or growth force. Growth force suggest that we have started to identify it's effects, but not understand it, or at least its source. We can describe it in a number of ways, but calling it god makes a god of the unknowns. Not a useful thing. God, the original cause, is also not realistic, as most of creation is physics, chemistry, biology, real material.
We have a three way split, material, forces, and possible a thought realm.
So where is this going?
We are born into our culture a blank slate. We learn and are taught a country, culture, religion, time, narrative. We are trained for some career(s) and continue in that narrative. We may change country's, by choice or chance, or by family decision. Again, none of this is inherently right or wrong, rather it is all narrative or story. Now we can evaluate all that narrative and through out that which does not fit, currently, culturally, personality, likes, dislikes. It does not matter, it is all meaningless, and without purpose beyond producing a next generation, and hopefully leaving the world in a better place, but we need only replacement population, not growth.
This growth in thinking is virtue, and the rules of society. The Government of Canada, in their infinite wisdom has made a decree that we shall not be raciest, misogynistic, homophobic, etc, etc. Bullshit, they cannot control what I think, only make it illegal to express my feelings. It is permitted to dislike individuals but not groups... Ya sure... We need a word to describe this... Govorrment decree. ( Ukrainian pronunciation)
The fist thing we must recognize is that there is a force in the world that is not visible, but drives us forward, causes life to grow, to reproduce, causes desire, drives us to eat, to act, to think. If there is a god of any kind it is that force, but since we can feel it we could name it the god force, or growth force. Growth force suggest that we have started to identify it's effects, but not understand it, or at least its source. We can describe it in a number of ways, but calling it god makes a god of the unknowns. Not a useful thing. God, the original cause, is also not realistic, as most of creation is physics, chemistry, biology, real material.
We have a three way split, material, forces, and possible a thought realm.
So where is this going?
 |
| More winter picks |
Monday, June 29, 2015
The Seperation of Religion and Ethics.
What does separation of religion and ethics have to do with anything? It is a brave new world we are living in, where old institutions like church, religions, are dyeing (changing color?), and nothing is arising yet to replace them. Religions provided extended social grouping, support for education, arts, great buildings, and numerous other functions. They were great for building community. The objection to atheism, seems to be lack of ethics, yet there is little connection between the two in any detailed way. Modern life has outstripped any ethics found in religion. Fraud is not a consideration in any religion, yet it is the primary issue of today.
Religion is typically the belief in the supernatural, or description of events that would require supernatural for them to occur. This is the totally delusional part of religion.
Some claim that religion produces ethics and virtue. Bull crap. Fear does not keep people in line. It is often used as a threat, especially to children, but that is verbal abuse of a form. This life time is all we get. We need to do good in this life time, and our memory is carried on among the those who survive us. That is all there is. Ethics must be instilled in people, as it is right to do right. In modern society, people are less obviously dependent on others and the relation between each other, yet we are more dependent as we are less physically self sufficient. We can be more emotionally distant from each other, as we have the ability to communicate with each other over great distances, and sort our relationship by interest.
Understand that our "purpose in life" is to cooperate, to reproduce, and in general to flourish as a species. Existence is meaningless until we paint on our purpose, our personal plan, for the day or life and then we can apply our motivation, once we have a plan. That plan can be action, or production, almost anything. It could be to create, produce, provide support to produce, or to raising of children or consciousness. Expending and extending knowledge, or documentation of knowledge, or transmitting that knowledge to others all works.
Evolution, the processes that brought us to this point in human development continue at there slow and unsteady pace with short periods of rapid change. We have not evolved to the same place, nor at the same time. There is a spread, likely some sort of normal distribution of development. We are not all at the same place.
As there is a normal distribution of brain cell column spacing, one end of the spectrum dyslectic, the other end autistic, with normal between, I expect that the range of evolution is similar. That leaves biodiversity high, which that suggest that there is better chances of survival.
Religion is typically the belief in the supernatural, or description of events that would require supernatural for them to occur. This is the totally delusional part of religion.
Some claim that religion produces ethics and virtue. Bull crap. Fear does not keep people in line. It is often used as a threat, especially to children, but that is verbal abuse of a form. This life time is all we get. We need to do good in this life time, and our memory is carried on among the those who survive us. That is all there is. Ethics must be instilled in people, as it is right to do right. In modern society, people are less obviously dependent on others and the relation between each other, yet we are more dependent as we are less physically self sufficient. We can be more emotionally distant from each other, as we have the ability to communicate with each other over great distances, and sort our relationship by interest.
Understand that our "purpose in life" is to cooperate, to reproduce, and in general to flourish as a species. Existence is meaningless until we paint on our purpose, our personal plan, for the day or life and then we can apply our motivation, once we have a plan. That plan can be action, or production, almost anything. It could be to create, produce, provide support to produce, or to raising of children or consciousness. Expending and extending knowledge, or documentation of knowledge, or transmitting that knowledge to others all works.
Evolution, the processes that brought us to this point in human development continue at there slow and unsteady pace with short periods of rapid change. We have not evolved to the same place, nor at the same time. There is a spread, likely some sort of normal distribution of development. We are not all at the same place.
As there is a normal distribution of brain cell column spacing, one end of the spectrum dyslectic, the other end autistic, with normal between, I expect that the range of evolution is similar. That leaves biodiversity high, which that suggest that there is better chances of survival.
 |
| frosty tree tops one winter day |
Saturday, June 27, 2015
Unbeleivers
What would a instruction book to teach the art of life for the unbeliever look like?
It would include suggested behaviors and thoughts for all forms of Non-believers, Non-theist, atheist and even Spinzoa theist. It would be more catholic than the Catholic Church, for it would include all those useful and true concepts like family, social community, compassion, and disallow anything that physically hurt other people. Catholic means inclusive. That is something the Catholic church is not.
It would need to include high level ethics, logic, and reasons for all the stances it took, starting at what we call in engineering "first principals". Water flows down hill. You cannot push a rope. Vacuums suck. Compression squeezes molecules together. Time goes forward, and the like first principals that are difficult to argue with, but may need to be expressed. Its main purpose would be to teach, in the span of years, what it took our ancestors centuries to work out. There is automatically room for improvement, for this is a state of the concept paper, not a final draft or proclamation.
It would need to state clearly these first principals. A supernatural god does not exist. We do not know all the answers yet. Logic is our only clear tool. We are born to cooperate, since our purpose is to flourish and reproduce. We have done that quite well, and now we need to understand how to get along in ever increasing density until we have the political will to control our population. I see this document, belief system as a composite of Maslow, stoic, Buddhist, Spinzoa, positive psychology, philosophy, all that is believed to be true and right, but with the provision to test everything, and use that which works and helps (buddhist). Ethics would need to be the foundation as well as real psychology in understanding how we get ourselves to do logic. This is all of the above, combined. There are parts that must be cleaned up, and other things that cannot be. Buddha hallucinated, likely due to fasting, so that portion should be left out.
First, we need to agree that the logical way to proceed is logical, not historical beliefs driven. These beliefs have brought us to where we are, a lot of us but no piece. The question is how do we go forward from here? It is through a logical belief system, based on logic, not prescription. We are all equal, that is rational humans are all equal, and logic must control all decisions. Now how about the non-rational among us? Those who do not yet have control of ourselves that others do? And then that are the ungifted, as Marcus called them. There are the infirm, mentally challenged, and the young who logic ability has not developed. Hell, there are lots among us who have not developed logic, or have chose not to. Stewardship may be the answer. More education, training, or the like. Evolution is not uniform among the population, that is for sure folks.
Equality has it's limits. And then there is the starting philosophy, religion, superstitions, delusions, and purposeful deceptions that we maintain. We all would like life to be simpler, easier, more pleasant, and perhaps harbor a delusion that it should be more to our liking. Many harbor a concept that we should like something and then just buy it, regardless of cost. Not practical in a logical society. The logic says we should have a need, and manage by controlling our needs. We need to practical, frugal, even minimalistic.
We need to understand our personal identity, as one of the unbelievers who use stoic/buddhist philosophy. There are cultural identity and individual identity, primary and secondary identities. We have individual identities as our primary identity, natives and blacks seem to have their cultural identity as primary, hence the poor mes attitudes, but that is not germane here.
Enough of my stream conscious/daydream.
It would include suggested behaviors and thoughts for all forms of Non-believers, Non-theist, atheist and even Spinzoa theist. It would be more catholic than the Catholic Church, for it would include all those useful and true concepts like family, social community, compassion, and disallow anything that physically hurt other people. Catholic means inclusive. That is something the Catholic church is not.
It would need to include high level ethics, logic, and reasons for all the stances it took, starting at what we call in engineering "first principals". Water flows down hill. You cannot push a rope. Vacuums suck. Compression squeezes molecules together. Time goes forward, and the like first principals that are difficult to argue with, but may need to be expressed. Its main purpose would be to teach, in the span of years, what it took our ancestors centuries to work out. There is automatically room for improvement, for this is a state of the concept paper, not a final draft or proclamation.
It would need to state clearly these first principals. A supernatural god does not exist. We do not know all the answers yet. Logic is our only clear tool. We are born to cooperate, since our purpose is to flourish and reproduce. We have done that quite well, and now we need to understand how to get along in ever increasing density until we have the political will to control our population. I see this document, belief system as a composite of Maslow, stoic, Buddhist, Spinzoa, positive psychology, philosophy, all that is believed to be true and right, but with the provision to test everything, and use that which works and helps (buddhist). Ethics would need to be the foundation as well as real psychology in understanding how we get ourselves to do logic. This is all of the above, combined. There are parts that must be cleaned up, and other things that cannot be. Buddha hallucinated, likely due to fasting, so that portion should be left out.
First, we need to agree that the logical way to proceed is logical, not historical beliefs driven. These beliefs have brought us to where we are, a lot of us but no piece. The question is how do we go forward from here? It is through a logical belief system, based on logic, not prescription. We are all equal, that is rational humans are all equal, and logic must control all decisions. Now how about the non-rational among us? Those who do not yet have control of ourselves that others do? And then that are the ungifted, as Marcus called them. There are the infirm, mentally challenged, and the young who logic ability has not developed. Hell, there are lots among us who have not developed logic, or have chose not to. Stewardship may be the answer. More education, training, or the like. Evolution is not uniform among the population, that is for sure folks.
Equality has it's limits. And then there is the starting philosophy, religion, superstitions, delusions, and purposeful deceptions that we maintain. We all would like life to be simpler, easier, more pleasant, and perhaps harbor a delusion that it should be more to our liking. Many harbor a concept that we should like something and then just buy it, regardless of cost. Not practical in a logical society. The logic says we should have a need, and manage by controlling our needs. We need to practical, frugal, even minimalistic.
We need to understand our personal identity, as one of the unbelievers who use stoic/buddhist philosophy. There are cultural identity and individual identity, primary and secondary identities. We have individual identities as our primary identity, natives and blacks seem to have their cultural identity as primary, hence the poor mes attitudes, but that is not germane here.
Enough of my stream conscious/daydream.
Thursday, June 25, 2015
Is that the natural you or did you learn that?
Is that the natural you or did you learn that? This suggest there are two of us, a natural us, on which learned behaviors, beliefs, values; philosophies, are loaded. So we can learn new things at the personality level, belief level, emotional level. OK. I just realized that I am pretty much a sociopath like; I just just do not care about other people; that is not to say that I behave that way; I have learned to care for some. Some other things just need to be done, regardless of there cost. Oh well, shit happens. Other things, I cannot force myself to do.
When I do a cost/benefit analysis on overeating, the desire for food out weights anything else, at times. It is a short term irrational pull, that I must learn to resist, not allow to start, or displace it. It is that basic self that is in control, not the learned behaviors. So the effect is there, but the learned behaviors are not as strong as the root native characteristics.
This also has down sides. I wanted out of my home situation as a child. It was a wait, eat, grow, age, situations, just waiting to be big enough and old enough to get out. I was gone in days after writing that last final exam of grade twelve, but no diploma, I flunked English, the undiagnosed dyslexia played a role in that. Plan completed. On my own. No plan for the future. Not good. Find a job, make money, find a place to live, etc. Oh well, that was almost 50 years ago, it is over, I am retired, no plan for the future. Now I have the time to study philosophy and my mind's workings or not workings. It does not matter. I care about other people about as much as they care about me. So are we social by nature or is that learned behavior, knowing that we do better as a social group than as individuals? Learned I think.
I now know that I am a introvert because I feel anxiety on meeting new people, unlike the extrovert who feels joy or pleasure on meeting new people. I forced myself to do it anyway, even though I felt anxiety. That feeling has just become stronger, to the point that I am a extreme introvert. But is that a characteristic of a sociopath, feeling? Not quite. For society to flourish we need to work together and get along to some extent. There is a continuum of cooperation levels, world, country, province, county, area, tribe, family, individual. But individual is singular. Are we or are we two, mind and body; natural and learned; but that make we are four, and 2 by 2 matrix. Yes, we need to cooperate with ourselves.
But we need to come first so our priority level may be generally reversed, self first to country last. Occasions may arise that we put other levels over ourselves, but these are special. Family for some, but not consistently, and then what about the human detritus with our family. There are some who are just evil among us. There are those we are better to not associate with. There are those too, who abuse and use us. These are the worst of the lot, know them and respect them for what they are, and deal with it all that way.
There are those also who push lofty ideas on us from above, the politicians, who do not need to live in our situation. Regardless of what they say, some of the concepts will never be accepted by all the people, some will not be accepted by but a few, US racial or Canadian Native situations for example. Politics can dictate over our bodies, but they cannot control our beliefs.
When I do a cost/benefit analysis on overeating, the desire for food out weights anything else, at times. It is a short term irrational pull, that I must learn to resist, not allow to start, or displace it. It is that basic self that is in control, not the learned behaviors. So the effect is there, but the learned behaviors are not as strong as the root native characteristics.
This also has down sides. I wanted out of my home situation as a child. It was a wait, eat, grow, age, situations, just waiting to be big enough and old enough to get out. I was gone in days after writing that last final exam of grade twelve, but no diploma, I flunked English, the undiagnosed dyslexia played a role in that. Plan completed. On my own. No plan for the future. Not good. Find a job, make money, find a place to live, etc. Oh well, that was almost 50 years ago, it is over, I am retired, no plan for the future. Now I have the time to study philosophy and my mind's workings or not workings. It does not matter. I care about other people about as much as they care about me. So are we social by nature or is that learned behavior, knowing that we do better as a social group than as individuals? Learned I think.
I now know that I am a introvert because I feel anxiety on meeting new people, unlike the extrovert who feels joy or pleasure on meeting new people. I forced myself to do it anyway, even though I felt anxiety. That feeling has just become stronger, to the point that I am a extreme introvert. But is that a characteristic of a sociopath, feeling? Not quite. For society to flourish we need to work together and get along to some extent. There is a continuum of cooperation levels, world, country, province, county, area, tribe, family, individual. But individual is singular. Are we or are we two, mind and body; natural and learned; but that make we are four, and 2 by 2 matrix. Yes, we need to cooperate with ourselves.
But we need to come first so our priority level may be generally reversed, self first to country last. Occasions may arise that we put other levels over ourselves, but these are special. Family for some, but not consistently, and then what about the human detritus with our family. There are some who are just evil among us. There are those we are better to not associate with. There are those too, who abuse and use us. These are the worst of the lot, know them and respect them for what they are, and deal with it all that way.
There are those also who push lofty ideas on us from above, the politicians, who do not need to live in our situation. Regardless of what they say, some of the concepts will never be accepted by all the people, some will not be accepted by but a few, US racial or Canadian Native situations for example. Politics can dictate over our bodies, but they cannot control our beliefs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)