My Family and other Animals

[Mikal]

Hi Austin…to understand the word “Poseidon and Ra” which are parts of an esoteric allegory, one must understand the cultural background and the nature of the times in which Plato lived and wrote.

First of all Plato was an initiate of the Greek Mystery Schools and the initiates were sworn to secrecy concerning what they called educational philosophy. Secondly as we can see from the tragedy of Socrates philosophers had to take extra caution not to upset the mores of the times. It is evident Plato conveyed in safely guarded terms well known as a “coded system” common to all initiates. Basically we could say he was speaking above the common masses of his time.

For your information “Poseidon-Zeus-Hades” were esoteric metaphors for three kosmic states of consciousness, kosmic here meaning the totality of the subjective and objective universe. This was a diagrammatic model of 3 parts in a 7 fold structure to understand both consciousness and the universe, the seven-fold structure representing the overall field of consciousness and an inconceivable duality of being.

Ra was another esoteric allegory in the Heliopolitan theology depicting the creation myth in the Bible and again pertaining to the same mystery system of thought and the same coded system all ancient philosophers studied and conveyed back and forth to one another.

This is as easy to understand that when we talk to each other for example we say last night I went to sleep….we never say last night I went into the rhythms of the night…it is all about MEANING….


Regards Mikal

[austintorn@aol.com]

We see evolution differently then, Austin, as the process of evolution seems most intent on the continuation of 'life forms', though I will agree that it does not seem to have a vested interest in which forms are successful in relation to which others.

True, no vested interest, those who were in a position to ‘adapt’ and survive, not necessarily
‘nice’ (could even be ‘mean’).

Still, I tend to wonder why all species of my experience offer a great struggle to survive, when the alternative of doing nothing is by far the easier choice?

Survial is the brain’s objective, sometimes even thinking its way into the afterlife in order to continue on, hesitant to accept obliteration.

[austintorn@aol.com]

The Theistic Evolution trial resumes…

Judge Graybeard looks half-asleep, but seems to be listening with one ear.

The prosecution continues:

“It has been suggested that God’s mindset is very slow compared to the ‘speedy’ time of the operation of the universe, and thus I submit that God would not have been alert or responsive enough to direct evolution through mutation.”

The defense objected, stating that they would have to check with their Client on this, the judge asking how long would this would take, noting that it took over 200 years for a response to Haiti’s pact with the Devil.

“Oh, about a million years.”

“OK, we’ll reconvene… Wait! We can’t wait that long… so I’ll allow the claim that God says that He directs mutations. Let the record show both opinions.”

“Thank you, judge, for our theory can adapt to any and all turns of events.”

The trial droned on…

Testimony:

Why would God create complete ecosystems only to have them virtually annihilated, so that entirely different ecosystems would temporarily emerge in their place, only to meet the same fate, over and over again?

Had the asteroid which wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago missed the earth, it's likely that our little branch on the tree of life would never have developed, since the end of dinosaur dominance made it possible for our small mammal ancestors to flourish. How are such chance contingencies in the history of life compatible with the alleged providence of a Creator?

(Graybeard—the judge, was fully awake now and was carving something out of a large block of wood, which was said not to be a boat or a cargo-cult thing; but he still watched the proceedings with one eye.)

Worse still, consider the vast amount of suffering needed to secure our existence through natural selection. The environment "selects" those organisms best adapted to it, not the most even-tempered ones.

Consequently, numerous predatory creatures have evolved which regularly inflict suffering on prey and host animals. The screw-worm fly (Cochliomyia hominivorax), for instance, lays its eggs in the wounds or eyes of mammals (including humans), causing any wounds to widen when the eggs hatch and the larva eat the surrounding tissue. This attracts more congeners, further widening wounds.

Untreated, such parasitism often leads to a gruesome death. Or consider the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) which causes autoimmune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). Is a great evolutionary success one which creates immense suffering among human beings?

(It was now getting near 3 PM, the judge announcing, “That’s it for today; let’s meet again sometime, after my vacation.)

[Graybeard]

While the act of creating is a conscious process.

The Judge: You can't just say this ... you can propose it as an alternative, and provide reasoning why is it so ? There are other alternatives, with reasoning, that do not require a conscious process

procreation is instinctive to all life.

True ... but it has nothing to do with the previous statement ? The reason it is so instinctive is because it is beneficial, and therefore less beneficial go extinct ... such as 'not-instinctive' to procreate ?

Provided a plan, purpose or intention to refine information to achieve the most desirable outcome is acknowledged

Why must a plan, purpose or intention be acknowledged ? Once again there are alternatives that do not require a plan, and yet still provide the most desirable (most fit) outcome. These alternative provide logical sequences that are backed by biology and fossil records.

What reasoning do you provide that leads to a preconceived plan ?

the details pre-conception are beyond our reckoning and must be at the liberty of individual, personal choice. Further, this privilege of choice should not in any way become insitutionalized in order to marshall power. Acknowledgement of and adherence to the 'mission statement' by the individual, will ensure the fair, reasonable and equitable distribution of power across all humanity.

Once again, what evidence for a mission statement ... and, just out of interest, what is that mission statement.

In two paragraphs, you propose a non-disputable purpose, without evidence, and then speculate that while choice be allowed, 'strong' individuals must be contained by 'bending the knee' to this undefined purpose ... else they 'marshal' all power ??? And that wouldn't be fair to the less strong ?? Do all dictatorships start out as mild censorship and benevolence ?

Adoption of this 'mission statement' must inevitably result in the total re-design of the methods of human interaction and open new avenues for the co-operative advancement of human endeavour.

Your proposal requires 'checks and balances' and you implicitly admit this in your statement ... ?

Evolution is self governing, and needs no checks and balances. Occam's Razor ??

Your intellect is your mental power to think, understand and draw conclusions logically. Mental power aside from thought is your capacity to focus, concentrate, observe and decipher. It takes effort to focus and concentrate which enhances the skill to observe and decipher. Effort is exertion of determination which is firmness of purpose to calculate. Mental power would seem to be enhanced by the tendency to be meticulous and discerning with information and retentiveness with memory and patience.

Nothing I am describing here is physical and tangible and seems to be more about the content or what is going on inside a person. There is still no conclusive evidence that would tell any of us these things are in the brain or even why all these things give rise to an experience of consciousness.

Everything you are describing is physical and tangible, and requires energy. The Human brain uses 60% of our energy intake ?? Stop eating for a week or two (no energy intake) and see how clearly you perform all of the above ??

We have a greater capacity for love, unfortunately for most, it appears to be coupled with hate. We have the ability to be stewards of the others, or murders. I guess it's a loaded option. We have the ability to pass detailed information along even if we don't reproduce.

A nuclear warhead is no different than the sun! I mean it's just to a lesser extent, the same thing! Nonhuman animals practice stewardship of many other species, and they write books, build computers, schools, hospitals? Are you from another planet? I wonder if somewhere other primates are questioning "why are we here, how do we save polar bears, what effect are we having on the environment, how can I make my tree more ... banana efficient?"

You just haven't thought about it deeply enough .... There are many many species that can do this.

Are you saying we are the absolute apex of evolution? That "super" beings are an impossible and improbable evolutionary result? Seems like we have come a long way from amino acids, inanimate matter ... I guess this is the end.

No .... he is just saying that we, along with all current species are most fit at the present time ??

We see evolution differently then, Austin, as the process of evolution seems most intent on the continuation of 'life forms', though I will agree that it does not seem to have a vested interest in which forms are successful in relation to which others.

Life forms continue under evolution, but without intent ?

I likewise contemplate, that the life-force may well be the exclusive domain of that which has been fortunate enough to have won the lottery of coming into existence.

Hold that thought ...... at last someone sees what Austin is saying.

Still, I tend to wonder why all species of my experience offer a great struggle to survive, when the alternative of doing nothing is by far the easier choice?

No I don't agree ... its not the easier choice ... those that mutate towards it .. go extinct.

Austintorn quote:
"Evolution is a blind watchmaker."

Not just blind...deaf, dumb, handless, illiterate...actually, brainless...absolutely incorporeal...but then so is the genetic code - that packet of information responsible for all life.

All of the above. True. And that is the wonder ... that random chance, operating upon conditions that are the outcomes of previous events, leads inevitably, irrevocably, to complexity. And, unlike all other alternatives, this one can be explained step by step by probability and statistics. Further, statistical predictions can be made from previous records ... otherwise we could not fight disease ... one example only.

Austin, please expand on the delivery of this most sophisticated of all information out of this immensely slow, wasteful, pitiless, and cruel process, because that would seem to reflect the manner in which humans learn - which, believe it or not, requires some intelligence.

All you need to do is to read 'The Origin of Species' ??

Austin,

I almost get the sense you walk around somedays and have no clue what your life is for. "What's the point of us?" Who's fault is that, God's or evolution?

I can imagine someone who doesn't know him, or understand what he is saying ... saying that. ... Austin knows what he is talking about ... you just can't hear him. The understanding of evolution does not lead to pointlessness or despair ... but to understanding.

cool bananas ... greg

[Graybeard]

Jaludin Rumi (30 September 1207 – 17 December 1273), Sufi

• Originally, you were clay. From being mineral, you became vegetable. From vegetable, you became animal, and from animal, man. During these periods man did not know where he was going, but he was on a long journey nonetheless. And you have to go through a hundred different worlds yet.

My interpretation of this, a personal one, is to delete the word 'man', and accept that Rumi is addressing life, not man

Sufi Logic and the logic of natural selection share a common qualia ... so that without having to believe in one, it can still be used to explain the other ?

cool bananas ... greg

[Mikal]

Austin cannot know for others, knowing and understanding is personal. From despair comes understanding, I know because I experienced it....


Regards Mikal

[Graybeard]

Austin cannot know for others, knowing and understanding is personal. From despair comes understanding, I know because I experienced it....

Regards Mikal

The only understanding comes from truth .... its not personal ... it just is what is ...

[Mikal]

As the eye or ear, together with the brain, are sense-organs, the brain itself is not a mind-organ; or, more precisely, the brain is not an intellect-organ. The most that can be said of the brain in relation to the human mind is that it is an intellect-support organ upon which the intellect depends, without which it cannot think, but with which it does not think.

Regards Mikal

[Meem]

Originally Posted by Meem
A nuclear warhead is no different than the sun! I mean it's just to a lesser extent, the same thing! Nonhuman animals practice stewardship of many other species, and they write books, build computers, schools, hospitals? Are you from another planet? I wonder if somewhere other primates are questioning "why are we here, how do we save polar bears, what effect are we having on the environment, how can I make my tree more ... banana efficient?"

Graybeard,
You just haven't thought about it deeply enough .... There are many many species that can do this.

LoL ... I know you won't like this, but you said it, not me!


Maybe you mean more like this though?

[Graybeard]

As the eye or ear, together with the brain, are sense-organs, the brain itself is not a mind-organ; or, more precisely, the brain is not an intellect-organ.

All our senses do ... taste, touch, smell, see, hear .... is detect electrical impulses ..... they are just electrical multi-meters (volts, amps ... watts and frequency) ... the brain does exactly the same detect and emit electrical impulses ??

The most that can be said of the brain in relation to the human mind is that it is an intellect-support organ upon which the intellect depends, without which it cannot think, but with which it does not think.

If, as you say, the Intellect depends on the brain .... the brain is the Intellect's support organ .... and the Intellect can't think or perform without the brain ..... and yet the brain, we know, physically exists ....

Then isn't it obvious to anyone who is rational that they are obviously the same bloody thing ??

What evidence do you have that the Intellect is separate ?
And if so, how did it come about, where was it born, when did it team up with the body ?
And if it is a separate entity, why does it need the support of the physical brain .... where is the connection ...

..the brain itself is not a mind-organ; the brain is not an intellect-organ.

I think you will regret saying this ... its nonsense

Dear Possum ... kiss

cool bananas ... greg