City-Data Forum Why people choose to be irrational? (applied, humans, self)
 User Name Remember Me Password [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.

08-29-2015, 04:36 PM
 Location: Chicago 5,559 posts, read 3,665,661 times Reputation: 2181

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Matadora Define Creative Intelligent vs what you think it does would you? Who or what lead you to such beliefs? Who or what did the influencing? No 1+1 would never =10. Try that bad math with your bank account and see how far it gets you. Try that bad math on pharmaceutical formularies and see how poorly these products perform. People are different and you can't just box everyone in with narrow definitions. Everyone uses rationality and everyone at times does not. You can't just can't make blanket statements about people...it does not represent reality.
Try this out for calculating 1+1 and see what it equals.

Binary Calculator - Addition, Subtraction, Multiplication and Division

08-29-2015, 04:55 PM
 Location: Pacific 🌉 °N, 🌄°W 11,037 posts, read 4,783,975 times Reputation: 7066
Quote:
 Originally Posted by richrf Try this out for calculating 1+1 and see what it equals. Binary Calculator - Addition, Subtraction, Multiplication and Division
I see once again you are the Master of Misinformation. You don't even understand the Binary System.

1 + 1 → 0, carry 1 (since 1 + 1 = 2 = 0 + (1 × 2^1) )

Adding two "1" digits produces a digit "0", while 1 will have to be added to the next column. This is similar to what happens in decimal when certain single-digit numbers are added together; if the result equals or exceeds the value of the radix (10), the digit to the left is incremented:

5 + 5 → 0, carry 1 (since 5 + 5 = 10 = 0 + (1 × 10^1) )
7 + 9 → 6, carry 1 (since 7 + 9 = 16 = 6 + (1 × 10^1) )

You clearly have no clue what the binary system represents. In the Binary System 1+1 still equates to 2. You have a lot to learn.

Define Creative Intelligent vs. what you think it does? Who or what lead you to such beliefs? Who or what did the influencing?

Last edited by Matadora; 08-29-2015 at 05:14 PM..

08-29-2015, 10:41 PM
 Location: Not-a-Theist 3,440 posts, read 1,572,271 times Reputation: 461
Quote:
 Originally Posted by richrf One cannot use concepts such as "naturally programmed" or "instinct" and be any closer to understanding the nature of life.
What is so complex about the "nature of life" that is beyond human understanding.
As long as we are confining it within the 'empirical' it is possible to be understood, it is just a matter of producing the evidence.

When you claim there is something beyond human understanding, then that is merely escapism to the supernatural.

What I claimed as "naturally programmed" or "instinct" can be tested and verifiable and translated into practical actions. I am sure you are not disputing the various instincts of human. All babies has the natural instinct to 'suckle' and it is obvious the purpose is for 'survival' of the individual and therefrom the species.

Quote:
 They are just placeholders for a fundamental force that I call Intelligence.
Note whatever it is called, "that" is always conditioned by an "I".
'That' which you called 'intelligence' cannot stand by itself, i.e. exists independent of yourself or the human collective.
If you claim "it" exists by independent itself, that can only be an illusion.

The concept "Intelligence" or "Creative Intelligence" is imposed by yourself and not that it exists by itself independently.

The serious philosophical argument to this is Kant's Copernican Revolution & thing-in-itself, Philosophical Realism versus Philosophical anti-realism, etc.

08-29-2015, 10:55 PM
 Location: Chicago 5,559 posts, read 3,665,661 times Reputation: 2181
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Continuum What is so complex about the "nature of life" that is beyond human understanding. As long as we are confining it within the 'empirical' it is possible to be understood, it is just a matter of producing the evidence. When you claim there is something beyond human understanding, then that is merely escapism to the supernatural. What I claimed as "naturally programmed" or "instinct" can be tested and verifiable and translated into practical actions. I am sure you are not disputing the various instincts of human. All babies has the natural instinct to 'suckle' and it is obvious the purpose is for 'survival' of the individual and therefrom the species. Note whatever it is called, "that" is always conditioned by an "I". 'That' which you called 'intelligence' cannot stand by itself, i.e. exists independent of yourself or the human collective. If you claim "it" exists by independent itself, that can only be an illusion. The concept "Intelligence" or "Creative Intelligence" is imposed by yourself and not that it exists by itself independently. The serious philosophical argument to this is Kant's Copernican Revolution & thing-in-itself, Philosophical Realism versus Philosophical anti-realism, etc.
If you want to talk about supernatural forces, we can begin with instincts and programmed genes (exactly who or what is doing the programming?). It is absolutely incredible scientists can throw around such magical suoernatural forces without being questioned. Any other magic you wish to discuss? Of course the greatest magic trick of them all is Evolution which just magically emerges and occurs. It just happens - without any supernatural forces??

Intelligence is "more there" than anything else that one can set forth. At least it is readily observable every moment of every day of our lives and can be easily tested.☺ Remember that part of your education?

The bottom line is that scientists imbue Intelligence into every single process and entity they describe and then deny that there is Intelligence. How do they perform this magic? Why, it just happens! That's right. These supernatural forces make it all happen.

Now try describing you evolutionary process without imbuing Intelligence into every single description of the process. You can't. You assume Intelligence and then deny it. Our little programmer or "instinct" are excellent case examples

Last edited by richrf; 08-29-2015 at 11:08 PM..

08-29-2015, 11:14 PM
 Location: Not-a-Theist 3,440 posts, read 1,572,271 times Reputation: 461
Quote:
 Originally Posted by richrf If you want to talk about supernatural forces, we can begin with instincts and programmed genes (exactly who or what is doing the programming?). It is absolutely incredible scientists can throw around such magical suoernatural forces without being questioned. Any other magic you wish to discuss? Of course the greatest magic trick of them all is Evolution weighing just magically emerges and occurs. It just happens - without any supernatural forces?? Intelligence is "more there" than anything else that one can set forth. At least it is readily observable every moment of every day of our lives and can be easily tested.☺ Remember that part of your education?
You are forcing words [supernatural forces] in the mouths of scientists.
Whatever evolutionary scientists has claimed is based on evidence and conditioned by evidence with the all necessary qualification, probabilities and uncertainties.
All scientists has been claiming are there is a correlation between one variable to another.
Others will extract whatever utilities they can from the said theory.

In addition with the said theory, even human can deliberate generate their own 'evolution' not the human deliberated evolution of dogs into their diversified breeds.
Scientist are not claiming there is an independent Evolutionary Force out there existing independent of humans in any way.

If you claim there is "intelligence" then humanity should harness such intelligence to direct it to resolve 'evil' but that is not the case and it is impossible in any way.

08-29-2015, 11:29 PM
 Location: Chicago 5,559 posts, read 3,665,661 times Reputation: 2181
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Continuum You are forcing words [supernatural forces] in the mouths of scientists. Whatever evolutionary scientists has claimed is based on evidence and conditioned by evidence with the all necessary qualification, probabilities and uncertainties. All scientists has been claiming are there is a correlation between one variable to another. Others will extract whatever utilities they can from the said theory. In addition with the said theory, even human can deliberate generate their own 'evolution' not the human deliberated evolution of dogs into their diversified breeds. Scientist are not claiming there is an independent Evolutionary Force out there existing independent of humans in any way. If you claim there is "intelligence" then humanity should harness such intelligence to direct it to resolve 'evil' but that is not the case and it is impossible in any way.
I'm not forcing any supernatural forces on scientists. They just continue to rely on supernatural forces to explain everything. Just substutute God for Evolution and you have the same story. Evolution does this. Evolution guides that. Evolution does everything. Evolution is wonderful word to use whenever you don't want to use God. Ditto for Instincts and Program. Earlier in the discussion we had the Constrainer and Randomizer. All beautiful substutute words for God. Just a renaming for the benefit of materialists. That is what I call the Great Sleight of Hand by the Creators of the Evolutionary story.

08-29-2015, 11:31 PM
 Location: Pacific 🌉 °N, 🌄°W 11,037 posts, read 4,783,975 times Reputation: 7066
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Continuum If you claim there is "intelligence" then humanity should harness such intelligence to direct it to resolve 'evil' but that is not the case and it is impossible in any way.
You are dealing with a person who loves to toss around the word Intelligence, BUT who does not have the Intelligence to understand Evolution or that 1+1 still equals 2 in the binary system.

08-29-2015, 11:43 PM
 Location: Not-a-Theist 3,440 posts, read 1,572,271 times Reputation: 461
Quote:
 Originally Posted by richrf I'm not forcing any supernatural forces on scientists. They just continue to rely on supernatural forces to explain everything. Just substutute God for Evolution and you have the same story. Evolution does this. Evolution guides that. Evolution does everything. Evolution is wonderful word to use whenever you don't want to use God. Ditto for Instincts and Program. Earlier in the discussion we had the Constrainer and Randomizer. All beautiful substutute words for God. Just a renaming for the benefit of materialists. That is what I call the Great Sleight of Hand by the Creators of the Evolutionary story.
In desperation you are mixing things up.

1. Scientist do not associate evolution as an entity, being or thing that exists and create.
2. Evolution is strictly restricted to the process between two variables, it is not claimed to be an entity like theists claim for their God.
1 and 2 are strictly different within their specific perspectives. It is wrong to conflate them as within similar perspective.

Some may assert Evolution does this. Evolution guides that. Evolution does everything. These are merely talks and not scientific.
What is scientific boils down to the evidence on hand.
If scientists claims humans and orang-utan share 96-98% of genes, this can be proven and verified with evidence.

If you claim "creative intelligence" create the moon and put it into orbit around the earth, then prove it with the necessary proofs?

08-30-2015, 07:27 AM
 Location: Chicago 5,559 posts, read 3,665,661 times Reputation: 2181
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Continuum In desperation you are mixing things up. 1. Scientist do not associate evolution as an entity, being or thing that exists and create. 2. Evolution is strictly restricted to the process between two variables, it is not claimed to be an entity like theists claim for their God. 1 and 2 are strictly different within their specific perspectives. It is wrong to conflate them as within similar perspective. Some may assert Evolution does this. Evolution guides that. Evolution does everything. These are merely talks and not scientific. What is scientific boils down to the evidence on hand. If scientists claims humans and orang-utan share 96-98% of genes, this can be proven and verified with evidence. If you claim "creative intelligence" create the moon and put it into orbit around the earth, then prove it with the necessary proofs?
Fine. Humans and orangutans are similar. Nice observation by scientists. They are really similar. Better observation. OK. I can buy that.

It's the supernatural forces that are guiding (natural selection) and magically creating everything (random constrained mutations) where it gets spooky for me.

As far rationality and irrationality. It is in the eyes of the beholder. For me it is just another term to play around with and has no useful meaning that can be used to guide one in his/her life. I suppose if people want to feel superior they can call themselves rational and the other persons irrational. Spock did it all the time but it didn't bother Kirk.

08-31-2015, 12:39 AM
 Location: Not-a-Theist 3,440 posts, read 1,572,271 times Reputation: 461
Quote:
 Originally Posted by richrf Fine. Humans and orangutans are similar. Nice observation by scientists. They are really similar. Better observation. OK. I can buy that. It's the supernatural forces that are guiding (natural selection) and magically creating everything (random constrained mutations) where it gets spooky for me.
As I mentioned even we human can deliberately intervened and manage natural selection if we want to. Humans has already done with the diversified breeds of dogs, cause many species to go extinct, strengthened bacteria against stronger antibiotics and the like.

There are no other supernatural forces that are independent of humans other than those that are empirical possible.

It is possible for any one to over whatever spookiness that you speak of. It is just a matter of relaxing some dogma, then think widely and rationally.

Quote:
 As far rationality and irrationality. It is in the eyes of the beholder. For me it is just another term to play around with and has no useful meaning that can be used to guide one in his/her life. I suppose if people want to feel superior they can call themselves rational and the other persons irrational. Spock did it all the time but it didn't bother Kirk.
Rational does not mean logically or dogmatically.
Rational simply mean acting in the direction of continually striving to be a progressive human being so as the contribute to the well being of the individual and therefrom humanity.

Spock was not thinking rationally but more of logical thinking.

In rational thinking one engage the various thinking and other mental faculties to optimize to a particular situation in alignment with the optimal well being of humanity.
Note the root "ratio" i.e. the computation to balance out proportions.
Thus rationality is not logical nor vertical, dogmatic thinking but take into account whatever that is necessary to arrive an optimal solution.

The underlying drive for rationality is 'survival.'
 Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over \$68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned. Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.