I remember that also, Sparrowdown. I think this one might fair better since it appears probability comes into play with the findings.
d4g
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/12/science/ligo-gravitational-waves-black-holes-einstein.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=homepage&clicksource=story-heading&module=photo-spot-region®ion=top-news&wt.nav=top-news&_r=0.
probably the biggest find since the higgs.. d4g.
I remember that also, Sparrowdown. I think this one might fair better since it appears probability comes into play with the findings.
d4g
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/12/science/ligo-gravitational-waves-black-holes-einstein.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=homepage&clicksource=story-heading&module=photo-spot-region®ion=top-news&wt.nav=top-news&_r=0.
probably the biggest find since the higgs.. d4g.
i posted this on another thread, and decided it deserves its own...thoughts?.
an unfortunate artifact of evolution is that belief can, and often does trump fact.
survival is at the core of what belief is about.
LisaRose - I agree, but we seem to be going the other way lately, away from rational thought, not towards it.
I think that there has always been a backlash to rational thinking. Take the Scopes' Monkey Trials, The US Civil War, the backlash to civil rights movement, etc. as evidence of that. The current political divide in the US and folks such as the "climate deniers" in the USA are current examples. These people do not represent the majority, but rather an, (often very), vocal minority. Their more vocal approach makes sense, because rather than using facts, they rely primarily on emotion, to make their point. Factual lines of argument are by nature, dispassionate.
I think this would be an excellent topic for a new OP, btw.
d4g
i posted this on another thread, and decided it deserves its own...thoughts?.
an unfortunate artifact of evolution is that belief can, and often does trump fact.
survival is at the core of what belief is about.
DJS-
Good points about MBTI, yet another framework that helps us understand human behaviors. I left this one out of the discussion so far, but thanks for bringing it in.
My wife is a Guardian type, (ESFJ). Many other guardian types, (ISTJ, for example), are thinking personalities, and it does happen that sensory/observant types are often thinking types, (more so than intuitive types, which are usually feeling). Intuitive thinkers, (rationals), are the rarest, at about 7% of the population. We are rare, and there is an over-representation of us on this board, (mine is INTJ). I have hypothesized this correlation has a lot to do with why we left to begin with.
d4g
i posted this on another thread, and decided it deserves its own...thoughts?.
an unfortunate artifact of evolution is that belief can, and often does trump fact.
survival is at the core of what belief is about.
TheOldHippie- But of course this is The Truth According To "Maslow's hierarchy of human needs"
And who says Maslow's truth is The Ultimate Truth ......?
Actually, no one said that but you, (true to your apologist form, I might add. No surprises here...).
First of all, Abraham Maslow was a psychologist. Psychology is a soft science, which means it is removed from "hard" scientific theory, (such as those that govern biology or physics), to a certain degree. Maslow's hierarchy merely serves as a framework to better understand several areas of human psychology, (including Festinger's dissonance theory and Freudian psychology), as well as hard science such as biology, and does compliment them well in this case. I make no reference to this being science in of itself at any level. This is my observation, thus why it does not even include cited references to external material. Unlike the WTS that you so valiantly defend, I know not to use ideas or concepts of others' work without citing them.
Secondly, good science never uses the word "truth", let alone "Ultimate Truth"...whatever the hell that is.
d4g
from the time i was a small boy - i loved rock n' roll music.
beatles, rolling stones, led zeppelin, hendrix.
i started getting slighted for the music i listened to as i lay in my bedroom listening on headphones to led zeppelin's song " black dog " at age 14 with my elder dad looking suspiciously at me as i'm rocking out .
JeffT- When i converted I trashed a lot of really classic Rock vinyl on the advice of a JW roommate. Got rid of Led Zeppelin, Rolling Stones, Doors, and King Crimson. I've replaced most of it on CD now, but the King Crimson is hard to find.
Two weekends ago I picked up a new vinyl copy on 200 gram vinyl, (yes, I still play LPs by choice), of King Crimson's In the Wake of Poseidon. Great record.
d4g
from the time i was a small boy - i loved rock n' roll music.
beatles, rolling stones, led zeppelin, hendrix.
i started getting slighted for the music i listened to as i lay in my bedroom listening on headphones to led zeppelin's song " black dog " at age 14 with my elder dad looking suspiciously at me as i'm rocking out .
My music taste was well established by the time I was baptized at 15. Same stuff you were/are into, Doors, Hendrix, Zep, Beatles, Who, Sabbath, etc. I remember early on, a rather cool slightly older sister, who used to drive me to meetings occasionally before I drove, (she had same music taste as I did), told me some nonsense about demonic messages in playing Stairway backwards. She was indeed cool enough to say, "Do what you want with that information", but stupid, guilty me decided to throw all of my Led Zep out. Idiot...That was in 1988, (incidentally, that same year, there was an MS in our hall that was a VP at Atlantic Records at the time, and went to Atlantic's 40th Anniversary show, where a reunited Zep actually played. His wife was a BIG Led Zep fan...). I bought it all back in the early 90s. I never let that happen again.
I learned early on to keep my music to myself, until I got to know people. Over the years, I learned that many JWs listened to the same stuff I did.
d4g
i posted this on another thread, and decided it deserves its own...thoughts?.
an unfortunate artifact of evolution is that belief can, and often does trump fact.
survival is at the core of what belief is about.
Doubtfully Yours - Believe me, there are plenty that know the facts but, for whatever reason, mainly fear of losing all social contacts and along with that one's sanity, we have just decided to go along with playing the WTBTS game.
Oh, we know.... We definitely know.😕
DY
DY, this is not what I am referring to. I understand many have to play along for the sake of family and other contacts. Those folks are aware, and mentally awake. This is about those that are not awake, despite the intelligence to know better.
d4g
i posted this on another thread, and decided it deserves its own...thoughts?.
an unfortunate artifact of evolution is that belief can, and often does trump fact.
survival is at the core of what belief is about.
He communicated with God, he saw angels...
No, those were just some damn good 'shrooms...
d4g
i posted this on another thread, and decided it deserves its own...thoughts?.
an unfortunate artifact of evolution is that belief can, and often does trump fact.
survival is at the core of what belief is about.
Fisherman - MW describes faith, it does not challenge the basis, you do.. Your post assumes that all faiths are based on snake oil. But faith simply means the belief and trust and hope in medicine that does work. And the eason you have faith in it is because you know for a fact that it does.
Bullshit. MW is quite clear what faith is. Did you actually read it? Faith in no way is based on fact. This is self-evident from the definition. Faith is a choice to accept something without evidence. Period. Stop your double-talk.
Fisherman - ...because faith can only be based upon proof.
See my point above about the definition of the word.
Don't troll my thread with this crap. I am not debating dictionary word definitions here. Are you the WTS? Words have accepted definitions, and your choosing to invent your own definition, because the actual definition is inconvenient for you, in no way validates your point. In fact, it is intellectually dishonest. If you have something constructive to offer, (even a valid counter point), please do so, but debating accepted definitions is not such.
d4g