A.Fenderson

Joined

• started 4 topics
• posted 268 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by A.Fenderson

• 
  5

  Skeptic Satire

  by metatron in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it's all about a duck!.

  http://drboli.wordpress.com/2009/12/15/the-duck/.

  metatron.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A.Fenderson

  ziddina: Well said!
• 
  5

  Wait a second, shouldn't all JW's stay current on the taxes they owe?

  by ldrnomo in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  looks like bro.

  prince is having a hard time paying ceasers things to ceaser.

  i think he's spending more than he's making therefore he is unable to pay the percentage owed to our illustrous ceaser.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A.Fenderson

  OK, I'm kinda out of the loop on this one. So is Prince considered a right and proper JW in good standing by the society and/or whatever congregation he potentially attends? When did this happen?
• 
  25

  The 100th Monkey

  by startingover in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the 100th monkeythe japanese monkey, macaca fuscata, had been observed in the wild for a period of over 30 years.. in 1952, on the island of koshima, scientists were providing monkeys with sweet potatoes dropped in the sand.

  the monkey liked the taste of the raw sweet potatoes, but they found the dirt unpleasant.. an 18-month-old female named imo found she could solve the problem by washing the potatoes in a nearby stream.

  she taught this trick to her mother.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A.Fenderson

  But there is a point at which if only one more person tunes-in to a new awareness, a field is strengthened so that this awareness is picked up by almost everyone!

  That's a pretty strong claim, and the mechanisms by which this supposed "field" is strengthened and consequently tapped into aren't touched on at all. Instead of applying Occam's razor and hypothesizing the simplest explanation, they've gone into very abstract claims without defining what they're talking about or hypothesizing the means by which this disembodied awareness is transferred over distances greater than what could be explained by current scientific theory. So it's really not science per se, much closer to mysticism, with a hip, new-age vibe. I would further argue, that like most other superstitious belief, it's actually harmful, because the feel-good "moral" of the story seems to be something along the lines of "if we get enough people to believe/realize something, the mere power of the belief itself will become strong enough to transfer the belief to other people without any necessary proselytizing." Even with the best of intentions, this wishful thinking won't accomplish anything, and detracts from the potential good done by actively trying to show and teach people outside the in-group about your great idea .

  On the plus side--for JW's anyway--it means they get to a point where field service is no longer necessary. ;-)
• 
  13

  DO YOU suffer from PARADIGM poisoning?

  by Terry in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  slow death by poisoning is a bad way to go!.

  like that old story about boiling a frog.

  (gradual heating keeps the frog from jumping out of the pot).. not knowing why you are slightly ill or not at your best keeps you from seeking remedy.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A.Fenderson

  I.E. I read Dr. Don Morse's book, "SEARCHING FOR ETERNITY", a scientist's journey to overcome death anxiety.

  Then I read Ernest Becker's "THE DENIAL OF DEATH" He is a Pulitzer Prize winner.

  I read Becker's book, and loved it, though it's been about thirteen years--I have it and was planning on rereading soon, so this is a good excuse.

  @Mall Cop: would you mind briefly summarizing each author's points, arguments, etc, and how that leads to what you feel is each writer's basic overall theory or feeling on the subject?

  @Terry: sorry if I'm contributing to an off-topic conversation above. I actually think the idea of the paradigm and its implications is one of the most important ideas I've ever come across, not only as applies to science (though perhaps especially here), but other fields and just life in general as well. I believe that most people would be very well served if they could be shown and reminded powerfully and often that their "knowledge" about the world is hugely filtered and polarized by the largely-unconscious low-level software in their brains, and that perception is an act of imagination and abstraction every bit as much as sensation, if not moreso. There are rare instances of things I've read (and maybe even more rarely seen in movies etc) that really drive these points home and impact me on a deep and even emotional level, revealing the active and flawed nature of perception, and I think it would be great for people who are familiar with the genesis of these small existential moments to be able to craft their own words or works that can induce these types of "light-bulb" moments in others as well. Have you ever tried doing specifically this, and if so how do you feel the attempt was received?
• 
  19

  Best way to get Netflix on my tv?

  by AK - Jeff in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  i know about roku, but currently don't think it any better than the laptop i have connected to my television to stream netflix.. i have considered a media-pc with remote or perhaps a remote keyboard and mouse.

  i like the idea of the tv subbing as an extra pc on occasion - plus i would like to be able to stream other programs besides just netflix [like fancast or national geo or history or some news clips].. any suggestions beyond or in addition?.

  thank you in advance.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A.Fenderson

  Anyway, isn't it worth $50-$60 more for a wireless Blu Ray than having to run cables around the house ???

  Some people have lots of trouble getting movies to stream wirelessly, because they're consistently using relatively high bandwidth for a real-time application, so it's potentially problematic. Other people have no problems. It probably depends a lot on the quality of the wireless transceiver at each end, and any potential interference or signal blockage in the area where it's set up. Ethernet will not be prone to these potential issues.
• 
  19

  Best way to get Netflix on my tv?

  by AK - Jeff in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  i know about roku, but currently don't think it any better than the laptop i have connected to my television to stream netflix.. i have considered a media-pc with remote or perhaps a remote keyboard and mouse.

  i like the idea of the tv subbing as an extra pc on occasion - plus i would like to be able to stream other programs besides just netflix [like fancast or national geo or history or some news clips].. any suggestions beyond or in addition?.

  thank you in advance.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A.Fenderson

  I know about Roku, but currently don't think it any better than the laptop I have connected to my television to stream Netflix.

  The PC client won't allow you to stream the HD feeds, AFAIK--only the various set-top boxes, BD players, 360/PS3, etc let you get HD content. The Wii client will be SD-only as well.

  Some Netflix-enabled BD players are only slightly more expensive than the HD Roku, so if you don't have a BD player, that seems to make the most sense.
• 
  159

  CHOICE may be a mere illusion. FREE WILL a trick of the mind's ego

  by Terry in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  things are what they are.. everything acts according to its nature.. nothing escapes its own nature.. we cannot be other than what we are and our "choices" follow our nature.. consequently, can we not say correctly that free choice is merely our ignorance of the fact that all our actions and choices are predetermined by our nature?.

  1. if you are offered either a handful of dog poop or a cold dove bar---is your "choice" really much of a choice?

  2. offer a heterosexual male a night with a hot chick or a hot dude...is the outcome really "choice"?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A.Fenderson

  Things are what they are.

  Everything acts according to its nature.

  Nothing escapes its own nature.

  In mathematics, "A=A" is a useful tautology, principle, or definition, because mathematics is a pure language, having no concrete referants, and 'A' can be intensionally defined and then known with absolute certainty to be nothing more than what is given in that definition.

  In life, however, "things are what they are" is a semantically null grammatical formulation, imparting no informational content. Intensional definitions of real-life subjects can easily fool one into thinking that by defining something (applying a label to it), everything worth saying about that thing has been summed up in one neat little idea--this is dangerous, because one can never say all there is to say, or know all there is to know, about any concrete subject.

  Having said that, I have a quasi-deterministic view of life--I allow for the possibility of quantum indeterminancies as mentioned by JWood, but these don't somehow magically produce free-will, nor do they necessarily imply uncaused or truly random behavior at the quantum level, but merely behavior far beyond our current ability to predict. So, free will does seem to be a mere illusion, but one that is necessary to human existence. When I first realized the logic of the deterministic argument, I went through an existential crisis and in fact a depression--but finally, I realized that existentially, one has to simultaneously accept (logically) the implications of determinism while irrationally and existentially saying essentially "Yeah, I don't really have free-will, but I think I do, and everyone else does too, so fuck it--that's good enough." This was to prevent my brain locking up and rendering me mentally and physically catatonic. And it's not like we're all tools of some outside consciousness or will who's moving us around like puppets--we're just little clockwork people who think (on some level) that our thoughts and decisions are immune to the laws of physics. We're still capable of feeling and enjoying life and believing we have free-will, so we might as well have a good time of it.

  Also, I believe the "Determinism versus Free-will" debate gives a false-dichotomy, or, at best, one against which far too many people have a very violent knee-jerk reaction because there's no way in hell you'll get them to admit they don't have free-will, therefore all logical reasoning is out the window before the debate is underway. I think instead the concept of determinism should rightfully be balanced against the concept of "uncaused events," which in and of itself is one of the most hilarious and nonsensical concepts I've ever come across. After you've gotten them to realize that determinism makes sense--because uncaused events don't--then you add "Oh, and by the way, that means you have no free will."
• 
  39

  Now That You Can Get Involved In Politics Is It All That Important To You?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  jws cannot get involved with politics.

  exjws certainly can and based upon responses from this site, many are quite opinionated about political matters.. are you very involved in politics at this point in your life?

  do you really believe that your opinion, your vote means all that in the big scheme of things?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A.Fenderson

  WT. says you CAN vote.

  Interesting--must have happened since '96. How recent is that change?
• 
  9

  Can JW really imagine what it is to live FOREVER?

  by Albert Einstein in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  while we were jw, we uncountedly stated, that we have a hope to live forever on earth, now really think about it:.

  dinosaurs lived here some 100 000 000 years ago.

  pangea splited into continents some 300 000 000 years ago.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A.Fenderson

  I remember getting frequent panic attacks due to thinking intently about living forever. My brain would go into some sort of feedback-loop at the absurdity of the concept as I got nearer and nearer to grasping what eternity entailed, and I would freak the hell out and have a very strong panic reaction--face flushed, heart pounding rapidly etc, and I would often start running as fast as I could in no general direction, all the while reassuring myself mentally (and sometimes even aloud) over and over that I would kill myself rather than get stuck living eternally.

  I don't think I was ever seen to do this by anyone (except once when I wasn't saying my mantra aloud and could pass it off as something else) but it must have been quite a site if someone had seen me sitting quietly one moment, then suddenly bolting at top speed towards nothing in particular, obviously scared out of my mind, repeating the phrase "I'll kill myself! I'll kill myself!" They would have thought I was demon-possessed for sure!

  And that was even considering eternal life on a paradise earth: I am utterly incapable of comprehending the terror that someone who believes in eternal torture in hellfire--with no possible escape--must go through when they really come close to grasping that concept.
• 
  7

  Evolution, Yes : Darwin, No

  by metatron in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/mar/19/evolution-darwin-natural-selection-genes-wrong.

  this is exactly where research needs to go - it sounds like lamarck reborn!

  australia proves that evolution happened but not how it happened!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  A.Fenderson

  I had planned on reading the entire article, but when the writer quoted MF'ing Ann Coulter(!!!) displaying her utter ignorance about evolution, logic, and life in general, and then posited that her comments were "a reasonable criticism of some pop-Darwinism," I almost wretched.

  So, as I'm unable to finish the article, though I'm only a few paragraphs from the end--please explain how this intersects with pantheism in your estimation, as I see no overlap personally.