Post questions or suggestions here.
-
Jason
- Posts: 1312
- Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 1:02 am
Post
by Jason » Fri Jan 06, 2006 9:49 pm
(Here is some beautiful intellectual candy for your ravenous minds. Scroll about 9 pages down to "CONTRIBUTORS" to get to the good stuff.)
http://www.edge.org/q2006/q06_index.html
DANGEROUS IDEAS
Something radically new is in the air: new ways of understanding physical systems, new ways of thinking about thinking that call into question many of our basic assumptions. A realistic biology of the mind, advances in evolutionary biology, physics, information technology, genetics, neurobiology, psychology, engineering, the chemistry of materials: all are questions of critical importance with respect to what it means to be human. For the first time, we have the tools and the will to undertake the scientific study of human nature.
What you will find emerging out of the 119 original essays in the 75,000 word document written in response to the 2006 Edge Question — "What is your dangerous idea?" — are indications of a new natural philosophy, founded on the realization of the import of complexity, of evolution. Very complex systems — whether organisms, brains, the biosphere, or the universe itself — were not constructed by design; all have evolved. There is a new set of metaphors to describe ourselves, our minds, the universe, and all of the things we know in it.
-
Kevin Solway
- Posts: 2766
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 8:43 am
- Location: Australia
-
Contact:
Post
by Kevin Solway » Fri Jan 06, 2006 11:08 pm
There's some interesting stuff there.
Jared Diamond has always impressed me. There is currently a documentary series running in Australia featuring this fellow. Last week he gave his explanation as to why some countries (eg, US, Europe, Australia, some parts of Asia) are rich, while others (eg, New Guinea) are poor.
His explanation is that the richer countries had better natural resources suited to mass food production, and particularly protein production - the surpluses of which gave people the luxury of time and energy to develop more specialized skills. I think he's right. But he's claiming the idea as his own. I remember my anthropology lecturer telling me the same thing in lectures more than twenty years ago.
-
avidaloca
- Posts: 231
- Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2001 6:24 pm
-
Contact:
Post
by avidaloca » Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:53 pm
Race riot suspect refused bail
Mob throws bricks at police
Riot suspect to appear in court
Train-guard punching investigated
Man dies after hit-and-run
Three die on roads
Semi explodes on freeway
Woman assaulted at knifepoint
Three men stabbed by two attackers
Man shot from outside house
This is a bit off topic but this is one of today's list of news reports in Australia at news.com.au, just for one state in the country.
There have been studies linking the news to depression and looking at that list, it's not hard to see why. This constant obsession with the minutiae of every event that causes any kind of destruction of life or property cannot be healthy.
-
propellerbeanie
- Posts: 154
- Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 5:06 am
Post
by propellerbeanie » Tue Mar 07, 2006 7:06 am
avidaloca wrote:Race riot suspect refused bail
Mob throws bricks at police
Riot suspect to appear in court
Train-guard punching investigated
Man dies after hit-and-run
Three die on roads
Semi explodes on freeway
Woman assaulted at knifepoint
Three men stabbed by two attackers
Man shot from outside house
This is a bit off topic but this is one of today's list of news reports in Australia at news.com.au, just for one state in the country.
There have been studies linking the news to depression and looking at that list, it's not hard to see why. This constant obsession with the minutiae of every event that causes any kind of destruction of life or property cannot be healthy.
Did everyone forget to Duck!
You need sensational stories to sell mediocre lies to people living medeocre lives.
The best defense is an informed mind. It will tell you when to run, if it likes you.
-
MKFaizi
Post
by MKFaizi » Tue Mar 07, 2006 10:45 am
That is an interesting site, Jason, and I will spend some time reading it. So far, I have only just glanced at it. God knows, it will be truly refreshing to read some dangerous ideas.
One article I glimpsed discussed the marriage option for everyone idea. Not that I want to get married ever again but, if I did, I would like to marry anyone or anything I want.
For instance, I might have wanted to marry my best friend who died some years back. I am not lesbian so it would never have been a sexual relationship but we could have benefitted from marriage. She could have been on my health insurance policy and her kids, too. She was good at fixing cars and doing physical things.
Anyway, my intention is not to harp on about myself. Just that I think people should be free to marry anyone they want, for whatever reason.
I will read that guy you and Kevin mentioned. So far, the only thing that puts me off a bit about the site is that all the "dangerous" thinkers are professionals or scientists. But I have not read that much yet.
Anyway, thanks for the link.
Faizi
-
MKFaizi
Post
by MKFaizi » Tue Mar 07, 2006 10:51 am
His explanation is that the richer countries had better natural resources suited to mass food production, and particularly protein production - the surpluses of which gave people the luxury of time and energy to develop more specialized skills. I think he's right. But he's claiming the idea as his own. I remember my anthropology lecturer telling me the same thing in lectures more than twenty years ago.
Yes, that idea has been around for quite some time. More than twenty years.
I think it is partially true. Yet, many of the poorest countries in Africa have plentiful natural resources that have never been tapped.
Much of poverty in the world is political.
Faizi
-
MKFaizi
Post
by MKFaizi » Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:59 am
All right, I got it. The reason that Africa is relatively undeveloped is because Africa did not have mammals that could be easily domesticated.
I just kind of find that hard to believe.
Jared also mentions that Europeans developed iron weapons before the rest of the world and that gave them an advantage.
Could be. But, damn. I find it hard to believe that that is the whole explanation.
Could it not be that different races or cultures had different priorities? For instance, could it be that cultures in ancient Africa and China were not interested in conquering the world? Could it be that ancient African and Chinese or Indian cultures were interested in things other than dominance?
Could it be that the European races were interested in war and conquering on a world scale? I realize that non-European tribes have always engaged in warfare among themselves. Native American tribes fought each other.
I wonder if the intrinsic desire for conquering the world, however, is a peculiarly "blue-eyed" genetic trait.
In Jared's writing, he mentions the shying away from racism. But I do not think that suggesting that the white race could be more war-like than other races can be offensive to anyone. Aggression does not equal superiority.
I know that it can be said that domination produces the leisure for "higher" thought.
Maybe.
Then, why is it that even Genius Forum extols the ancient thought of Buddha -- an Asian -- and Chuang Tsu -- another Asian?
Faizi
-
avidaloca
- Posts: 231
- Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2001 6:24 pm
-
Contact:
Post
by avidaloca » Tue Mar 07, 2006 12:12 pm
Could it not be that different races or cultures had different priorities? For instance, could it be that cultures in ancient Africa and China were not interested in conquering the world?
Having lived in West Africa for a few months at a young age I can tell you I saw no desire of those people for conquering the world - they don't want to conquer their own baser desires.
Still they're happy with what they are, which is why they are what they are. Overall they're happier than Westerners for sure, because they look in a different place for it.
-
MKFaizi
Post
by MKFaizi » Tue Mar 07, 2006 1:02 pm
From your observation, how would a West African define happiness? How does his definition make him happier than Westerners?
Are Westerners more interested in conquering base desires than the West Africans you observed?
Faizi
-
Jamesh
- Posts: 1526
- Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 3:44 pm
Post
by Jamesh » Tue Mar 07, 2006 1:59 pm
Much of poverty in the world is political.
nahh..both none of it is and all of it is. All of it is because we in non poverised areas could easily provide the resources to cater for poverty, but there would still be poverty because of people being subservient to the misinformation that flows from or induces emotions, which also allows selfish power to florish.
While emotions have control over people poverty will always be part of life, which is why I don't bother getting compassionately heated up when I see the sadness that poverty entales - you have to attack the power sources before you even bother trying to fix the poverty.
-
avidaloca
- Posts: 231
- Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2001 6:24 pm
-
Contact:
Post
by avidaloca » Tue Mar 07, 2006 2:02 pm
They seem happy "bopping" (as it was called) to ghetto blasters at the bus stop, being violent occasionally if they're in a gang, and for the milder ones, just smiling a lot and enjoying life without worries. Our driver, Taju (who was as Muslim with two wives) had a great disposition.
That's all I know. I didn't see any search for much else there but I was only nine years old at the time.
I'd say Westerners are interesting in conquering more than Africans. There's a different texture to a Westerner's life I guess. Africans are naturally happy, while Westerner's seek certain things and are not as simply pleased or fulfilled.
-
Jason
- Posts: 1312
- Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 1:02 am
Post
by Jason » Tue Mar 07, 2006 3:44 pm
MKFaizi wrote:So far, the only thing that puts me off a bit about the site is that all the "dangerous" thinkers are professionals or scientists.
Just keep in mind that I called it "candy" and posted it on the brothel. I wouldn't want you to think less of me for posting this stuff.
-
MKFaizi
Post
by MKFaizi » Wed Mar 08, 2006 10:56 am
Right, Jason. Thanks for that clarification.
Faizi
-
MKFaizi
Post
by MKFaizi » Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:01 am
you have to attack the power sources before you even bother trying to fix the poverty.
Yes. Poverty is political.
Faizi