At the basest level, everyone’s got everything you got. Throw sexuality into the mix, and you’ve got 2 different forms of man.
Mentality wise, we all have the idea that we are justified in what we do. Well, we used to back in the day. Now we have people unsure of themselves like an epidemic.
We also have the spirit with us, which lies within us. Perhaps not in any organ, or space, but perhaps the bloodstream, since it goes everywhere? Do we know how the body generates electrical synapses? Do we have absolute proof that our bodies are NOT under remote control by our spirits somehow?
HZ.. consciousness? firing synapses? red and white blood cells? et al… but what does it all add up to? the glorious and indifferent, self generating, self regulating universe that threw us up, might be to blame for creating the conditions for humans to inch their way out of the primordial slime.. but I think she’s too busy just being to either take the credit, if credit is due, or notice our puny concerns. Of course, hubristicaly we delude ourselves that the universe is made for us, and that we sit atop the ziggurat of all life forms, pouring scorn on ‘lesser’ forms. In reality I think the universe is an elephant, and we are the ticks on it’s arse. Of course, philosophically I’ll line up with you and BC, and agree it’s better for us ticks to kiss it’s arse than to kick it… even if it doesn’t notice either way.
to a rather vague question, is it about we, the people,we the mammals, we the discussion forum..? Any way, we all share homologues structures, – forearms, wings, fins. This is what relates us as verterates and that is a fact
From these comments I guess I should ask: how do you define we?
Res, you seem to speak of man, sexual/physical, mental, and spiritual. As far as “Do we know how the body generates electrical synapses?”, I was hoping HP could answer that one.
pj, are saying if it shits, it’s in your group?
musycks, your ‘we’ seems to include people who one way or another try to find meaning in this universe, for better or worse. Is your ‘we’ speaking of the BTers on F&B?
verisoph’s, ‘we’ is inclusive enough to include all vertebrates. Very broad of you.
I was hoping of getting some response from HP, or BWC before I said a word. So maybe I will wait. Please continue, write amongst yourself. It is something I hope we all like to do.
Resonator/HP it’s very easy to demonstrate that the nervous system generates electrical impulses (synapses are the just neural ‘junctions’ that connect the circuits). I don’t understand the problem or what Resonator is getting at. We understand fully the energy in/energy out equation and the chemocal processes involved. As for our bodies being under remote control, the absolute proof that we have is that it is not a theory that addresses any issue we have therefore it it for a ‘remote control’ advocate to suggest what proof he or she has that such a thing is going on and how such remote control intervenes in a well understood process.
As for what we have in common I’m with verisoph – define your terms. Do you mean we the contributors to this website or we human beings?
As for our bodies being under remote control, the absolute proof that we have is that it is not a theory that addresses any issue we have therefore it it for a 'remote control' advocate to suggest what proof he or she has that such a thing is going on and how such remote control intervenes in a well understood process.
My feeling Herbie is that they have mapped out natural responses to the human mind when interacting with nature. Feelings of joy, pain, fear, these are all, if I may steal some of your words, synapses fired at the basest level of human understanding. What I see lacked in description is the process for controlled thought, controlled emotion.
I only question these things to make sure for myself what is really going on. I consider it a mission to question pretty much everything :P I’m sure a controlled response would deliver a much different analysis on the subject and possibly open a door?
pokoj… you may be onto something.. there are life forms that live entirely within an animals anus ;)…maybe we’re not a tick on an elephants backside.. more inside and constantly in the… well guess the rest. Hah… I’m twaddling again, but with a sh— eating grin at least!
BC… agreed… we are related to every life form, but I’ll draw the line at a stone… what say you?
“What I see lacked in description is the process for controlled thought, controlled emotion.” As has been reported in other threads neuroscience and psychology have made great progress in mapping the human consciousness as an emergent phenomenon arising from the ‘meat machine’. The structure of personality has been explored using scanning techniques and the study of individuals with brain damage and disease and also through developmental psychology.
What you and other advocates for some ‘spiritual controller’ fail to come to terms with is that in postulating such a controller you merely push the problem of consciousness back onto another entity and therefore create another problem. What is this spiritual controller? How does it create the phenomenon of consciousness? What is its structure? As with the god/creation issue simply saying ‘I don’t think that the brain can manufacture consciousness therefore it must be something else’ just pushes the problem away.
Supposing it were true that a controller not part of the causal world is really responsible for consciousness, you are left with the problem of how does it do it? Where is the evidence that controlling energy appears from outside of the system? How does it interact with the causal world? What is the structure and nature of this entity? You’ve just created a bigger set of problems without answering anything and with no supporting evidence.
How to define consciousness? Self awareness, perhaps? Is it not so that no test, no procedure or method can identify the presents of conscience in something? Is there any conclusive evidence that every person we meet, just like we are, is conscious, or is it just an assumption?
I would define consciousness as the awareness of self in time, the abilty to remember the past and to anticipate the future. Although it exists to a degree in other animal it has been vastly enhanced in humans by the development of language.
I agree with Jaynes and his bicameral mind theory. As language developed we were aware of more than one ‘voice’ gardually we learned to subdue these other voices and identify one consciousness. Clearly consciousness is a compound afair built up of responses to sensations and spread out over time. By learning to control this as the child develops and develops language we learn to understand causal relationships and this is what gives us our sense of the flow of time and our ability to reason.
The evidence for other consciousnesses is the Turing test or rather the assumption that Turing made. We interact all of our exploration of each other, the development of realtionships is the exloration of this realm between me and ‘not me’ yet ‘like me’.
The evidence for other consciousnesses is at least as good as our evidence for the rest of the causal world and indeed any useful definition of evidence is based on causal consistency unless you are a solipsist and that is a dead end philosophy.
Herbie,… looks like we’ve gone ‘round the block again and are back at the same problem of how does something intangible like a ’spirit’ or conscience or ‘soul’, which ia allegedly some kind of mystical moral overide controller from the invisible world, interact with the meat machine?
The believers are stuck on the ‘I feel’ argument and can present no evidence because none exists… but absence of evidence is evidence of absense.
It’s all human, all from within us, the good, the bad, the ugly. We are responsible for our own ignorance.
HZ, BC to take our commonality to the level of fundamental particles is to say nothing really, it’s just a tautology. If we didn’t exist in the same physical realm we could have no contact with each other. The mere fact that we can communicate and are aware of each other’s existence means that we have something in common. It doesn’t deepen anything.
musycks it’s worse than that. What frustrates me is that believers of various flavours think that postulating a spirit world actually explains anything. ‘I don’t know how it works’ – ‘well it’s a spirit’ – ‘oh that’s okay then’.
It is exactly equivalent to a dectective frustrated at being unable to solve a crime shruggs his shoulders and says ‘a spirit did it’. No better than witch doctors.
It makes me wonder if any real world explanation will ever be enough for them.
HP, I think life is already deep. Communicating certain things can deepen feeling and understanding. That is unless a person already knows everything and is numb to emotion and amazement? Right?
If you think some or all of what I say means nothing, that’s fine. Some people appreciate and love relationships. Even our relationship or commonality with star dust. Some might even think it’s worth repeating. I was just sharing a thought on the topic. Sorry for waisting your time with nothing.
BC.. apples and oranges… Herbie and I are frustrated by the fact that no logical explanation will ever be enough to satisfy those that are in thrall of the invisible world.
In a utilitarian sense I’m guessing Herbie might agree that it’s preferable to ‘love’ or show courtesy and respect than it is to be negative etc… the fact that that can be explained in a Darwinian sense might be a way to cheapen the mysticism for you, but it still works.
and communication is never a waste of time.. now settle down and have a banana.
On it goes, and the only thing the enlightened folks can do is to point out how ridiculous and ignorant the religious concepts are. In some believers, that only seems to reinforce the shallow and arrogant viewpoints.
Religion…perhaps the most insidious and clever mind-trap out there.
Time to move on, if that means becoming “spiritual”, I suppose that’s a step closer to operating like a reasonable human being.
musycks is right, no logical explanations seem to help folks understand how incredible and impossible their belief systems are.
HP, musycks, and ss, “It makes me wonder if any real world explanation will ever be enough for them”, I’m more than willing to discuss frequencies as a possible almost intangible, almost non physical, but still real, when you can receive it, possibility for emotional stimuli. Don’t get me started on radio waves, and how a hundred years ago they never existed in our puny little worlds. Frustrating to me is that ‘your kind’ for some silly reason, think it’s all figured out now. A little evolution, a little big bang, and there you go, done. Nothing left. We have reached our peak of understanding. And god people that are just as sure of their answers as you of yours frustrate me equally. Non interaction equals non existence. How true. Does this mean anything to you HP, canned food has no MHz, fresh vegetables are 2 to 12 MHz, fresh herbs range from 2 to 24 MHz? Essential oils range from 54 to 320 MHz. Does this jive with you? Have I been mislead by popular pseudo science? If these are true scientific facts, what can we infer from such facts? How do these frequencies change human emotion? Or is it of your opinion that aromatherapy, light therapy, hydro therapy and so forth therapy are all just bullshit therapy?
Allow me to simplify: if everything physical, including ourselves, are only so, because of a rate at which smaller things oscillate, wouldn’t it stand to reason that ingestion, or adding, a different rate of oscillation, to a person would change that person’s rate of oscillation.
Now I’m not quite sure where you stand on the frequencies of liquid chemicals and their placement in the brain through the olfactory system, or the frequency of thought, and it’s electrical influence on the brain, and how they effect the human emotion. I’d imagine you could care less, and therefore there is something we do not have in common.
More than likely we will have no more connection on this subject. No interaction. If we were to find nothing in common, we would eventual cease to exist. To each other.
(I thought aromatherapy was big in England. I was informed that even gps in the medical field were prescribing certain aromas for mood disorders).
HZ.. I would have thought that as aromas can be broken down chemically, and as the brain can be mapped for response to same, then there would be the possibility of researching the effects? it’s probably done for all I know, but then you and Herbie could debate the findings.. we all know the brain reacts to certain chemicals, some well, some badly… but it’s at least quantifiable.
But what are the effects of gamma rays on man in the moon marigolds??? :)
Yes musycks, I’m pretty sure they have mapped it out. And yes, I’m pretty sure HP and I would argue over the findings.
BTW, I do agree with you on the whole it’s in us to share. Everything we need to know is within us. Everything horrible and everything sublime. No devil or god required. Although they do make for good stories.
Hi HZ… don’t freak me out man! agreeing with me gets me nervous… not ;) I don’t know if you think there’s something external though? From my p.o.v I can’t see any outside getting IN and influencing what we do… it’s in us to start with and it’s a complex matter of chemicals and environmental programming as to how it comes out… both good and bad? what say Bokonon?
Haha, it seems no one has accomplished what they came to this website to do. I’m glad that one person hasn’t convinced everyone else to think like them, that would be boring. It’s amazing how you are all so right in your own little universes of existance.
I hope we can all agree that harmony is more pleasurable than disharmony.
Sorry, haven’t had a computer for 5 or 6 days. Kind of nice. Did a lot of reading. And laundry, go figure.
(Finished Slaugterhouse, Cat’s Cradle, Sirens of Titan, and now am starting Breakfast of Champions). It all seems heavier now, then when I first read Kurt.
musycks, of course there is external forces that influence internal motivations. Look what you did simply by calling me a Bokononist, I went out and bought five books and will have them all read within a month. I really haven’t read since my school days.
I think we’re all full of buttons, ready to be pushed, and someone has to do the pushing. Some people are better at pushing buttons than others, and some are nicer for pushing beneficial buttons. Whether I think there is a benevolent dictator of the universe or not really doesn’t matter, what matters is that I try my best, whatever it takes, while I live.
I thought crossed my mind the other day when I asked myself: who are you Dennis? Answer: I am a living thing. And the thing I am doing is: being human. I think that is what most of us have in common.
And yes JD, you can put me down for harmony with maybe a dash of discord for stimulation and growth.
Hey HZ… great Vonnegut effort!! The only one I’ve not read in that bunch is Brekkie of Champs… Sl’house 5 is one of my all time favourites.. as is the film by George Roy Hill. and Cat’s Cradle goes without saying I think!
and you’re right, let’s tick human as a common starting point and go fron there.. and your philosophy appeals to the utilitarian in me, take responsibility and do the best.
Thanks HZ.. your posts these days have a kind of effortless wisdom, even if you’ve worked your butt off to get there.
Glad to hear it HZ…. seeing we’re doing book club…. I’m halfway through Barry Obama’s first book. He’s one smart, cool dude! that’ll make a nice change… but can he dodge a size 10??
Original content is for Non-commercial use under Creative Commons. Except where otherwise noted.
Some Rights Reserved. Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
Discuss
Matt Pidlysny on November 30, 2008, 4:51 PM
At the basest level, everyone’s got everything you got. Throw sexuality into the mix, and you’ve got 2 different forms of man.
Mentality wise, we all have the idea that we are justified in what we do. Well, we used to back in the day. Now we have people unsure of themselves like an epidemic.
We also have the spirit with us, which lies within us. Perhaps not in any organ, or space, but perhaps the bloodstream, since it goes everywhere? Do we know how the body generates electrical synapses? Do we have absolute proof that our bodies are NOT under remote control by our spirits somehow?
pokój! on November 30, 2008, 5:46 PM
everybody poops
Musycks on November 30, 2008, 6:37 PM
HZ.. consciousness? firing synapses? red and white blood cells? et al… but what does it all add up to?
the glorious and indifferent, self generating, self regulating universe that threw us up, might be to blame for creating the conditions for humans to inch their way out of the primordial slime.. but I think she’s too busy just being to either take the credit, if credit is due, or notice our puny concerns.
Of course, hubristicaly we delude ourselves that the universe is made for us, and that we sit atop the ziggurat of all life forms,
pouring scorn on ‘lesser’ forms.
In reality I think the universe is an elephant, and we are the ticks on it’s arse.
Of course, philosophically I’ll line up with you and BC, and agree it’s better for us ticks to kiss it’s arse than to kick it… even if it doesn’t notice either way.
rock on Bokonon.
Giesela Dohrmann on November 30, 2008, 7:53 PM
to a rather vague question, is it about we, the people,we the mammals, we the discussion forum..? Any way, we all share homologues structures, – forearms, wings, fins. This is what relates us as verterates and that is a fact
Musycks on December 1, 2008, 1:24 AM
and pokoj… 100 lines for you boy…
I Must Not Make Poo Jokes.
dear me… young people today…. tut, tut…
dennis ilic on December 1, 2008, 10:35 AM
From these comments I guess I should ask: how do you define we?
Res, you seem to speak of man, sexual/physical, mental, and spiritual.
As far as “Do we know how the body generates electrical synapses?”, I was hoping HP could answer that one.
pj, are saying if it shits, it’s in your group?
musycks, your ‘we’ seems to include people who one way or another try to find meaning in this universe, for better or worse. Is your ‘we’ speaking of the BTers on F&B?
verisoph’s, ‘we’ is inclusive enough to include all vertebrates. Very broad of you.
I was hoping of getting some response from HP, or BWC before I said a word. So maybe I will wait. Please continue, write amongst yourself. It is something I hope we all like to do.
ss, how ’bout you?
Anyone?
How we can we be?
dennis ilic on December 1, 2008, 10:39 AM
And oh yeah,
happy December everyone,
11 down, 1 to go.
HerbieP on December 1, 2008, 10:54 AM
Resonator/HP it’s very easy to demonstrate that the nervous system generates electrical impulses (synapses are the just neural ‘junctions’ that connect the circuits). I don’t understand the problem or what Resonator is getting at. We understand fully the energy in/energy out equation and the chemocal processes involved. As for our bodies being under remote control, the absolute proof that we have is that it is not a theory that addresses any issue we have therefore it it for a ‘remote control’ advocate to suggest what proof he or she has that such a thing is going on and how such remote control intervenes in a well understood process.
As for what we have in common I’m with verisoph – define your terms. Do you mean we the contributors to this website or we human beings?
HerbieP on December 1, 2008, 11:17 AM
Sorry that should have been Reosnator/HZ I wasn’t inetnding to address myself.
dennis ilic on December 1, 2008, 12:46 PM
Defining we is up to the individual, I suppose.
If we do not have things in common, I cannot see, how we, could exist.
Matt Pidlysny on December 1, 2008, 2:24 PM
As for our bodies being under remote control, the absolute proof that we have is that it is not a theory that addresses any issue we have therefore it it for a 'remote control' advocate to suggest what proof he or she has that such a thing is going on and how such remote control intervenes in a well understood process.
My feeling Herbie is that they have mapped out natural responses to the human mind when interacting with nature. Feelings of joy, pain, fear, these are all, if I may steal some of your words, synapses fired at the basest level of human understanding. What I see lacked in description is the process for controlled thought, controlled emotion.
I only question these things to make sure for myself what is really going on. I consider it a mission to question pretty much everything :P I’m sure a controlled response would deliver a much different analysis on the subject and possibly open a door?
pokój! on December 1, 2008, 8:32 PM
hz that would be a putrid means of classification… but hey, at least I’d have a home…
We all have the ability to Love and/or Hate
sorry Mr. Roberts…
(yeh twaddling geezer)
ripe
Bryan Cridlebaugh on December 1, 2008, 9:26 PM
I think that we are all related to everything.
Musycks on December 2, 2008, 1:08 AM
pokoj… you may be onto something.. there are life forms that live entirely within an animals anus ;)…maybe we’re not a tick on an elephants backside.. more inside and constantly in the… well guess the rest.
Hah… I’m twaddling again, but with a sh— eating grin at least!
BC… agreed… we are related to every life form, but I’ll draw the line at a stone… what say you?
HerbieP on December 2, 2008, 3:19 AM
“What I see lacked in description is the process for controlled thought, controlled emotion.” As has been reported in other threads neuroscience and psychology have made great progress in mapping the human consciousness as an emergent phenomenon arising from the ‘meat machine’. The structure of personality has been explored using scanning techniques and the study of individuals with brain damage and disease and also through developmental psychology.
What you and other advocates for some ‘spiritual controller’ fail to come to terms with is that in postulating such a controller you merely push the problem of consciousness back onto another entity and therefore create another problem. What is this spiritual controller? How does it create the phenomenon of consciousness? What is its structure? As with the god/creation issue simply saying ‘I don’t think that the brain can manufacture consciousness therefore it must be something else’ just pushes the problem away.
Supposing it were true that a controller not part of the causal world is really responsible for consciousness, you are left with the problem of how does it do it? Where is the evidence that controlling energy appears from outside of the system? How does it interact with the causal world? What is the structure and nature of this entity? You’ve just created a bigger set of problems without answering anything and with no supporting evidence.
Giesela Dohrmann on December 2, 2008, 4:25 AM
How to define consciousness? Self awareness, perhaps?
Is it not so that no test, no procedure or method can identify the presents of conscience in something? Is there any conclusive evidence that every person we meet, just like we are, is conscious, or is it just an assumption?
sciencesaves on December 2, 2008, 8:49 AM
“We” all are conscious now, and we’ll all become unconscious later. All life on earth shares this common inherent cycle.
As pj2 said, “We will not know we’re dead”, that’s the thing about it.
Res. Good thoughts.
My cronies: Succinct and eloquent…even the stool mention.
HerbieP on December 2, 2008, 11:08 AM
I would define consciousness as the awareness of self in time, the abilty to remember the past and to anticipate the future. Although it exists to a degree in other animal it has been vastly enhanced in humans by the development of language.
I agree with Jaynes and his bicameral mind theory. As language developed we were aware of more than one ‘voice’ gardually we learned to subdue these other voices and identify one consciousness. Clearly consciousness is a compound afair built up of responses to sensations and spread out over time. By learning to control this as the child develops and develops language we learn to understand causal relationships and this is what gives us our sense of the flow of time and our ability to reason.
The evidence for other consciousnesses is the Turing test or rather the assumption that Turing made. We interact all of our exploration of each other, the development of realtionships is the exloration of this realm between me and ‘not me’ yet ‘like me’.
The evidence for other consciousnesses is at least as good as our evidence for the rest of the causal world and indeed any useful definition of evidence is based on causal consistency unless you are a solipsist and that is a dead end philosophy.
Bryan Cridlebaugh on December 2, 2008, 12:10 PM
musycks, stones too. Everything in the physical universe is made of star dust…right? We have that in common?
dennis ilic on December 2, 2008, 5:51 PM
I was wondering who would take it to star dust. Or elementary particles.
Which leads me to wonder: if we have more in common does that deepen a relationship?
Musycks on December 2, 2008, 9:40 PM
BC Loves me like a rock?… ouch!HZ.. another wise Canadian once wrote..
‘we are star dust, we are golden and we got to get ourselves back to the garrrrrrrden’!
Thanks Joni.. she took the words right out of your mouth.
Musycks on December 3, 2008, 1:08 AM
Herbie,… looks like we’ve gone ‘round the block again and are back at the same problem of how does something intangible like a ’spirit’ or conscience or ‘soul’, which ia allegedly some kind of mystical moral overide controller from the invisible world, interact with the meat machine?
The believers are stuck on the ‘I feel’ argument and can present no evidence because none exists… but absence of evidence is evidence of absense.
It’s all human, all from within us, the good, the bad, the ugly. We are responsible for our own ignorance.
No God required.
HerbieP on December 3, 2008, 2:21 AM
HZ, BC to take our commonality to the level of fundamental particles is to say nothing really, it’s just a tautology. If we didn’t exist in the same physical realm we could have no contact with each other. The mere fact that we can communicate and are aware of each other’s existence means that we have something in common. It doesn’t deepen anything.
HerbieP on December 3, 2008, 2:56 AM
musycks it’s worse than that. What frustrates me is that believers of various flavours think that postulating a spirit world actually explains anything. ‘I don’t know how it works’ – ‘well it’s a spirit’ – ‘oh that’s okay then’.
It is exactly equivalent to a dectective frustrated at being unable to solve a crime shruggs his shoulders and says ‘a spirit did it’. No better than witch doctors.
It makes me wonder if any real world explanation will ever be enough for them.
Giesela Dohrmann on December 3, 2008, 4:06 AM
to be a Mensch is the ultimate goal.
no god, no spirit no “witch” doctor neccessary
Bryan Cridlebaugh on December 3, 2008, 2:12 PM
HP, I think life is already deep. Communicating certain things can deepen feeling and understanding. That is unless a person already knows everything and is numb to emotion and amazement? Right?
If you think some or all of what I say means nothing, that’s fine. Some people appreciate and love relationships. Even our relationship or commonality with star dust. Some might even think it’s worth repeating. I was just sharing a thought on the topic. Sorry for waisting your time with nothing.
Musycks on December 3, 2008, 6:19 PM
BC.. apples and oranges… Herbie and I are
frustrated by the fact that no logical explanation will ever be enough to satisfy those that are in thrall of the invisible world.
In a utilitarian sense I’m guessing Herbie might agree that it’s preferable to ‘love’ or show courtesy and respect than it is to be negative etc… the fact that that can be explained in a Darwinian sense might be a way to cheapen the mysticism for you, but it still works.
and communication is never a waste of time.. now settle down and have a banana.
sciencesaves on December 4, 2008, 8:31 AM
“You can lead a horse to water…”
On it goes, and the only thing the enlightened folks can do is to point out how ridiculous and ignorant the religious concepts are. In some believers, that only seems to reinforce the shallow and arrogant viewpoints.
Religion…perhaps the most insidious and clever mind-trap out there.
Time to move on, if that means becoming “spiritual”, I suppose that’s a step closer to operating like a reasonable human being.
musycks is right, no logical explanations seem to help folks understand how incredible and impossible their belief systems are.
dennis ilic on December 4, 2008, 10:30 AM
HP, musycks, and ss, “It makes me wonder if any real world explanation will ever be enough for them”, I’m more than willing to discuss frequencies as a possible almost intangible, almost non physical, but still real, when you can receive it, possibility for emotional stimuli.
Don’t get me started on radio waves, and how a hundred years ago they never existed in our puny little worlds.
Frustrating to me is that ‘your kind’ for some silly reason, think it’s all figured out now. A little evolution, a little big bang, and there you go, done. Nothing left. We have reached our peak of understanding. And god people that are just as sure of their answers as you of yours frustrate me equally.
Non interaction equals non existence. How true.
Does this mean anything to you HP, canned food has no MHz, fresh vegetables are 2 to 12 MHz, fresh herbs range from 2 to 24 MHz? Essential oils range from 54 to 320 MHz.
Does this jive with you? Have I been mislead by popular pseudo science? If these are true scientific facts, what can we infer from such facts? How do these frequencies change human emotion? Or is it of your opinion that aromatherapy, light therapy, hydro therapy and so forth therapy are all just bullshit therapy?
HerbieP on December 4, 2008, 10:39 AM
You’ve got it HZ all bullshit, but some people feel better for it.
I’ve no idea what you are talking about with those frequencies.
dennis ilic on December 4, 2008, 11:24 AM
Allow me to simplify: if everything physical, including ourselves, are only so, because of a rate at which smaller things oscillate, wouldn’t it stand to reason that ingestion, or adding, a different rate of oscillation, to a person would change that person’s rate of oscillation.
Now I’m not quite sure where you stand on the frequencies of liquid chemicals and their placement in the brain through the olfactory system, or the frequency of thought, and it’s electrical influence on the brain, and how they effect the human emotion. I’d imagine you could care less, and therefore there is something we do not have in common.
More than likely we will have no more connection on this subject. No interaction. If we were to find nothing in common, we would eventual cease to exist. To each other.
(I thought aromatherapy was big in England. I was informed that even gps in the medical field were prescribing certain aromas for mood disorders).
Ah well, all’s well, that ends well.
Musycks on December 4, 2008, 7:06 PM
HZ.. I would have thought that as aromas can be broken down chemically, and as the brain can be mapped for response to same, then there would be the possibility of researching the effects? it’s probably done for all I know, but then you and Herbie could debate the findings.. we all know the brain reacts to certain chemicals, some well, some badly… but it’s at least quantifiable.
But what are the effects of gamma rays on man in the moon marigolds??? :)
garden on my radio wave friend.
dennis ilic on December 5, 2008, 3:28 PM
Yes musycks, I’m pretty sure they have mapped it out. And yes, I’m pretty sure HP and I would argue over the findings.
BTW, I do agree with you on the whole it’s in us to share. Everything we need to know is within us. Everything horrible and everything sublime. No devil or god required. Although they do make for good stories.
Musycks on December 7, 2008, 9:54 PM
Hi HZ… don’t freak me out man! agreeing with me gets me nervous… not ;)
I don’t know if you think there’s something external though?
From my p.o.v I can’t see any outside getting IN and influencing what we do… it’s in us to start with and it’s a complex matter of chemicals and environmental programming as to how it comes out… both good and bad? what say Bokonon?
Jeff Delano on December 10, 2008, 1:17 AM
Haha, it seems no one has accomplished what they came to this website to do. I’m glad that one person hasn’t convinced everyone else to think like them, that would be boring. It’s amazing how you are all so right in your own little universes of existance.
I hope we can all agree that harmony is more pleasurable than disharmony.
Musycks on December 10, 2008, 3:28 PM
and very wise Mr Delano… and that’s freakin’ me out too! :)
dennis ilic on December 10, 2008, 5:42 PM
Sorry, haven’t had a computer for 5 or 6 days. Kind of nice. Did a lot of reading. And laundry, go figure.
(Finished Slaugterhouse, Cat’s Cradle, Sirens of Titan, and now am starting Breakfast of Champions). It all seems heavier now, then when I first read Kurt.
musycks, of course there is external forces that influence internal motivations. Look what you did simply by calling me a Bokononist, I went out and bought five books and will have them all read within a month. I really haven’t read since my school days.
I think we’re all full of buttons, ready to be pushed, and someone has to do the pushing. Some people are better at pushing buttons than others, and some are nicer for pushing beneficial buttons. Whether I think there is a benevolent dictator of the universe or not really doesn’t matter, what matters is that I try my best, whatever it takes, while I live.
I thought crossed my mind the other day when I asked myself: who are you Dennis?
Answer: I am a living thing. And the thing I am doing is: being human.
I think that is what most of us have in common.
And yes JD, you can put me down for harmony with maybe a dash of discord for stimulation and growth.
Love and Peace big thinkers
Musycks on December 10, 2008, 6:33 PM
Hey HZ… great Vonnegut effort!! The only one I’ve not read in that bunch is Brekkie of Champs… Sl’house 5 is one of my all time favourites.. as is the film by George Roy Hill. and Cat’s Cradle goes without saying I think!
and you’re right, let’s tick human as a common starting point and go fron there..
and your philosophy appeals to the utilitarian in me, take responsibility and do the best.
Thanks HZ.. your posts these days have a kind of effortless wisdom, even if you’ve worked your butt off to get there.
dennis ilic on December 11, 2008, 4:38 PM
muse, I just a couple of chapters in on a book I’ve already forgotten, but it, (B of C), seems like it is going to be a doozie.
dennis ilic on December 16, 2008, 1:26 PM
It certainly was a doozie.
Musycks on December 18, 2008, 2:10 AM
Glad to hear it HZ…. seeing we’re doing book club…. I’m halfway through Barry Obama’s first book. He’s one smart, cool dude! that’ll make a nice change… but can he dodge a size 10??
dennis ilic on December 19, 2008, 11:01 PM
That Bush sure does have cat like reflexes doesn’t he?
I rarely read non-fiction. I prefer well written, creative, and intelligent foma.
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register