from the world's big
Disproving Jesus Existed
I was so fed up with not being able to view my idea that i decided to post it again. I saw the first two comments, and was about to post a response to them when the idea went down. I didn't see the last two (sorry)but please repost them.
Well we all know that it is impossible to prove a negative, but at what point can one argue that so many of the core attributes of an individual are inaccurate or impossible that the traditional understanding of that individual is no longer valid. If we were to learn that Christopher Marlowe was the true author of works like "Romeo and Juliet," "Macbeth," and "Hamlet" than our previous understanding of "Shakespeare" would be completely wrong. Though a person named Shakespeare would still have lived, he would not have been the person we thought he was, and one might not be wrong to say that the Shakespeare who was arguably the greatest writer in the English language, the Shakespeare as we now know him, never really existed (or in the least that the genius playwright identity previously understood as "Shakespeare" should now be known as "Marlowe"). Can the same be true of Jesus? We can never prove that a Jesus didn’t exist, but if we can, through logic and reason, strip Jesus of his major attributes (god, son of god, performer of miracles, resurrection, ect), or show him to be more myth than man, than wouldn’t the traditional understanding of "Jesus" become so distorted as to be no longer recognizable? Most of Jesus’ more amazing attributes can be found in mythologies that predate his birth. Tales of a "son of god" were common and the theme of a "god" dying and then rising into heaven had also already been written (Krishna, Buddha). In fact almost every one of those acts that people associate with Jesus can be shown to have existed in a pervious mythological character. This, to me, makes Jesus less unique, and severely undermines the credibility of claims that he actually did what others had previously only done in myths. Such miraculous acts can also be attacked from a physics standpoint, since many are impossible according to the laws of physics (everything from a virgin birth to water into wine and the multiplication of loaves and fishes). If one were to see Jesus attacked in such a way is there really any solace in saying that it is impossible to prove he never existed, since the Jesus that probably did exist possessed none of the traits we currently identify as his? Corroborating evidence outside of the bible that points to Jesus’ existence is also incredible (not "amazing", but "not credible"). Writings like Josephus’ "Antiquities of the Jews" that mention Jesus were copied exclusively by Christian scribes. Most scholars now agree that the major portion of this text that discusses Jesus was falsified by scribes who were probably surprised by the suspiciously few mentions of their savior in such histories, and attempted to correct the obvious oversight. There are no credible sources that can be used to show that the Jesus of the bible ever existed, that the identity given him is not completely contrived. I believe that his identity as most understand it is complete myth. While a man named Jesus may have existed from roughly 1 BCE till 33 CE, his birth was not announced by a new star, he did not perform miracles, and he was not god or god’s son; and therefore he was not really "Jesus." I believe that "Jesus" never existed. Thoughts?
Sallie Krawcheck and Bob Kulhan will be talking money, jobs, and how the pandemic will disproportionally affect women's finances.
A recent study on monkeys found that stimulating a certain part of the forebrain wakes monkeys from anesthesia.
- Scientists electrically stimulated the brains of macaque monkeys in an effort to determine which areas are responsible for driving consciousness.
- The monkeys were anesthetized, and the goal was to see whether activating certain parts of the brain would wake up the animals.
- The forebrain's central lateral thalamus seems to be one of the "minimum mechanisms" necessary for consciousness.
Pixabay<p>When the team electrically stimulated a part of the brain called the central lateral thalamus, located in the forebrain, the monkeys woke up: they opened their eyes, blinked, reached out, made facial expressions and showed altered vital signs. </p><p>"We found that when we stimulated this tiny little brain area, we could wake the animals up and reinstate all the neural activity that you'd normally see in the cortex during wakefulness," Saalmann told Cell Press. "They acted just as they would if they were awake. When we switched off the stimulation, the animals went straight back to being unconscious."</p><p>This area of the brain may function as an "engine for consciousness," Redinbaugh told Inverse. Although past studies have shown that electrical stimulation can arouse the brains of humans and animals, the new findings are unique because they reveal which specific neural interactions appear to be minimally necessary for consciousness.</p><p>"Science doesn't often leave opportunity for exhilaration, but that's what that moment was like for those of us who were in the room," Redinbaugh told <a href="https://www.inverse.com/science/first-squid-mri-study-brain-complexity-similar-dogs" target="_blank"><em>Inverse</em></a><em>.</em></p>
Future applications<p>The team said the findings could have many applications down the road, but more research is needed.</p><p>"The overriding motivation of this research is to help people with disorders of consciousness to live better lives," Redinbaugh told Cell Press. "We have to start by understanding the minimum mechanism that is necessary or sufficient for consciousness, so that the correct part of the brain can be targeted clinically."</p><p>"It's possible we may be able to use these kinds of deep-brain stimulating electrodes to bring people out of comas. Our findings may also be useful for developing new ways to monitor patients under clinical anesthesia, to make sure they are safely unconscious."</p>
The coronavirus pandemic has brought out the perception of selfishness among many.
- Selfish behavior has been analyzed by philosophers and psychologists for centuries.
- New research shows people may be wired for altruistic behavior and get more benefits from it.
- Crisis times tend to increase self-centered acts.
Paul Krugman on the Virtues of Selfishness<div class="rm-shortcode" data-media_id="7ZtAkm6C" data-player_id="FvQKszTI" data-rm-shortcode-id="828936bf6953080e9018307354c0c02b"> <div id="botr_7ZtAkm6C_FvQKszTI_div" class="jwplayer-media" data-jwplayer-video-src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/7ZtAkm6C-FvQKszTI.js"> <img src="https://cdn.jwplayer.com/thumbs/7ZtAkm6C-1920.jpg" class="jwplayer-media-preview" /> </div> <script src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/7ZtAkm6C-FvQKszTI.js"></script> </div> The Nobel Prize-winning economist on the virtues of selfishness.
Evolution Is Moving Us Away from Selfishness. But Where Is It Taking ...<div class="rm-shortcode" data-media_id="cyeqmYCb" data-player_id="FvQKszTI" data-rm-shortcode-id="6c5efecb56456e9acc25cf36935b1826"> <div id="botr_cyeqmYCb_FvQKszTI_div" class="jwplayer-media" data-jwplayer-video-src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/cyeqmYCb-FvQKszTI.js"> <img src="https://cdn.jwplayer.com/thumbs/cyeqmYCb-1920.jpg" class="jwplayer-media-preview" /> </div> <script src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/cyeqmYCb-FvQKszTI.js"></script> </div>
Exploring Morality and Selfishness in Modern Times<div class="rm-shortcode" data-media_id="02eX1Cag" data-player_id="FvQKszTI" data-rm-shortcode-id="45cc6180db791f32683988fb52faff26"> <div id="botr_02eX1Cag_FvQKszTI_div" class="jwplayer-media" data-jwplayer-video-src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/02eX1Cag-FvQKszTI.js"> <img src="https://cdn.jwplayer.com/thumbs/02eX1Cag-1920.jpg" class="jwplayer-media-preview" /> </div> <script src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/02eX1Cag-FvQKszTI.js"></script> </div> Philosopher Peter Singer discusses the state of global ethics.
Parenting could be a distraction from what mattered most to him: his writing.
Ernest Hemingway was affectionately called “Papa," but what kind of dad was he?