Top | Newest First | Oldest First
reflectingmonkey · 51-55, M
interesting video, thanks. somehow it reminds me of how I think it shouldn't be permitted to expose children to religious dogma because it warps their ability to think for themseves, especially with such brainwashing concepts as "you must believe without seeing" and the notion that doubting is a sin. once that sort of idea finds its way into someone's brain , especially at an early age, its almost like poisoning a tree so that its fruit never actually ripens because thinking and doubting are very closely related, to evolve one has to be able to accept the idea that he might be wrong, this is why science is based on methodological doubt.
View 2 more replies »
@MartinTheFirst That's extremely poor teaching if a school says a kid should "believe" in evolution.
Better teaching would show how sedimentary rocks are formed, and how the bottom layers are always the oldest. They would show how the age of rocks can be dated via the half-life of its minerals' radioactivity.
Then they'd take the kids on excursions to see the fossil skeletons of prehistoric animals in the places where they are being excavated from the rock.
They'd show how elements (atoms) form into molecules and compounds and how molecules form into proteins, RNA and DNA. They'd show how DNA determines how an animal grows and behaves.
And then they'd show how DNA changes, and what causes some variations to survive and multiply, while others don't.
Better teaching would show how sedimentary rocks are formed, and how the bottom layers are always the oldest. They would show how the age of rocks can be dated via the half-life of its minerals' radioactivity.
Then they'd take the kids on excursions to see the fossil skeletons of prehistoric animals in the places where they are being excavated from the rock.
They'd show how elements (atoms) form into molecules and compounds and how molecules form into proteins, RNA and DNA. They'd show how DNA determines how an animal grows and behaves.
And then they'd show how DNA changes, and what causes some variations to survive and multiply, while others don't.
MartinTheFirst · 26-30, M
@hartfire
Did you know that it practically can't be proven that it works, nor is there any reason to believe that it works for anything significant unless you believe in evolution? Some types of carbon-dating they make has errors with +- millions of years according to their calculations, well what if it's less than a million years? There's also a lot of simplifying assumptions about a general equilibrium in the world which they use as a basis for carbon dating that might be completely wrong.
That has nothing to do with evolution
I understand what you're trying to say but those things are not things you can teach to a kid, you can just give them a false sense of confidence that someone smarter than them have the answers and tell them they should believe in it for that reason.
They would show how the age of rocks can be dated via the half-life of its minerals' radioactivity.
Did you know that it practically can't be proven that it works, nor is there any reason to believe that it works for anything significant unless you believe in evolution? Some types of carbon-dating they make has errors with +- millions of years according to their calculations, well what if it's less than a million years? There's also a lot of simplifying assumptions about a general equilibrium in the world which they use as a basis for carbon dating that might be completely wrong.
They'd show how elements (atoms) form into molecules and compounds and how molecules form into proteins, RNA and DNA. They'd show how DNA determines how an animal grows and behaves.
That has nothing to do with evolution
I understand what you're trying to say but those things are not things you can teach to a kid, you can just give them a false sense of confidence that someone smarter than them have the answers and tell them they should believe in it for that reason.
MartinTheFirst · 26-30, M
@hartfire Read this article and don't make the initial assumption that it's people's fossil fuel emissions that changed the environment. Is it really so farfetched that something of this nature took place before the industrial revolution? Or is it all just bullshit?
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-02057-4
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-02057-4
I think this line of reasoning requires clearer definition of words.
The way the narrator uses the word stupidity refers to a lack of nous or emotional intelligence.
Emotional intelligence starts with a willingness to feel, acknowledge and understand our own inner emotions. This leads to insight into how and why we behave as we do. It allows us to recognise the emotions of others and respond to them with empathy and kindness.
We need emotional intelligence in order to develop our understand of harmful, harmless and beneficial behaviours and thus lead an ethical life.
There are at least six kinds of intelligence: logical, visual-spatial, technical, proprioceptive, mathematical/musical, creative and emotional. Intellect, which predominantly analytical, can include a combination of types.
Lack of emotional intelligence is usually due to parents who have low EI.
When we're very young, our caregivers teach words in association with what we perceive and experience. Thus we learn to generalise a colour like yellow from butter, dandelion flowers, canaries, etc.
If a parent mirrors and names our emotion, we learn how it feels and how to give that feeling a name. Happy, calm, excited, amazed, sad, fearful, angry, jealous and so on.
If a parent forbids a specific emotion, such as displays of anger, and refuses to address the cause appropriately, that child will grow up repressing the emotion, often so successfully that they have no idea when they're feeling it. This means they will also have trouble recognising and dealing appropriately with anger in others.
At the extreme end of the spectrum, this can lead to zero empathy and not caring about the feelings and needs of others. It is, in essence, a failure of emotional growth and maturity. At its worst, some of these people can be "evil", that is, sociopathic and extremely harmful.
But almost all of us experience at least some failings in our emotional intelligence, especially if we ourselves are momentarily in a bad state and trying to deal with something difficult.
The way the narrator uses the word stupidity refers to a lack of nous or emotional intelligence.
Emotional intelligence starts with a willingness to feel, acknowledge and understand our own inner emotions. This leads to insight into how and why we behave as we do. It allows us to recognise the emotions of others and respond to them with empathy and kindness.
We need emotional intelligence in order to develop our understand of harmful, harmless and beneficial behaviours and thus lead an ethical life.
There are at least six kinds of intelligence: logical, visual-spatial, technical, proprioceptive, mathematical/musical, creative and emotional. Intellect, which predominantly analytical, can include a combination of types.
Lack of emotional intelligence is usually due to parents who have low EI.
When we're very young, our caregivers teach words in association with what we perceive and experience. Thus we learn to generalise a colour like yellow from butter, dandelion flowers, canaries, etc.
If a parent mirrors and names our emotion, we learn how it feels and how to give that feeling a name. Happy, calm, excited, amazed, sad, fearful, angry, jealous and so on.
If a parent forbids a specific emotion, such as displays of anger, and refuses to address the cause appropriately, that child will grow up repressing the emotion, often so successfully that they have no idea when they're feeling it. This means they will also have trouble recognising and dealing appropriately with anger in others.
At the extreme end of the spectrum, this can lead to zero empathy and not caring about the feelings and needs of others. It is, in essence, a failure of emotional growth and maturity. At its worst, some of these people can be "evil", that is, sociopathic and extremely harmful.
But almost all of us experience at least some failings in our emotional intelligence, especially if we ourselves are momentarily in a bad state and trying to deal with something difficult.
Ynotisay · M
What was interesting is that while I found the perspective to be right on the nut, using the word "stupid" was a little jarring. Probably just because of what's around that word.
BibleData · M
@Ynotisay
It is dismissive and well it should be. You can't reason with them. There is no defense against them. You can only prevent their being conditioned to stupidity, but that isn't profitable. It's counterproductive to the financial and political incentive.
Not saying it isn't appropriate. But it is dismissive.
It is dismissive and well it should be. You can't reason with them. There is no defense against them. You can only prevent their being conditioned to stupidity, but that isn't profitable. It's counterproductive to the financial and political incentive.
BibleData · M
@Ynotisay "Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty." ― Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse: Dune.
The fear is, I think, a product of the imagination of the people. The people are the enemy of the state. From the superstition and ignorance of religion, politics and now science - that's the history of the world. People make themselves stupid to feel safe. It's groupthink. Take away the incentive. If stupidity is the metaphorical dragon of our time, of the ages, of the world - the zeitgeist, the spirit of the world - we can't fight the dragon, we can't train, that is, reform the dragon, we must starve the dragon. Take away the incentive. If the incentive is money - and it is - take it away. It's obsolete.
The fear is, I think, a product of the imagination of the people. The people are the enemy of the state. From the superstition and ignorance of religion, politics and now science - that's the history of the world. People make themselves stupid to feel safe. It's groupthink. Take away the incentive. If stupidity is the metaphorical dragon of our time, of the ages, of the world - the zeitgeist, the spirit of the world - we can't fight the dragon, we can't train, that is, reform the dragon, we must starve the dragon. Take away the incentive. If the incentive is money - and it is - take it away. It's obsolete.
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
Yeah atheists are rather stupid. They imagine that they know everything and have reasons for everything. They are too dumb for words.
BibleData · M
@hippyjoe1955
Interesting.
I am making comments on stupid people. Stupid people think they know everything. Smart people know better. I never said I watched the video.
Interesting.
ImperialAerosolKidFromEP · 51-55, M
@hippyjoe1955 you used to be an atheist. Did your IQ suddenly just jump when you believed in God?
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@ImperialAerosolKidFromEP Stupid has nothing to do with IQ.
checkoutanytime · M
German history is entwined with ancient superstitious beliefs, the Americans believe God is a combination of nature and popular culture, or atleast it used to mean that before the super sized government took away God.