do you believe in god? why...

bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
do you believe in god? why...

I have a neural condition known as Asperger's Syndrome, because of that I think using symbolic logic. (not everyone with aspergers thinks like this I just happen to be wired this way) I can't understand how anyone can think that there is a "god".

this is my proposal "If there is a god and it created everything to have a choice of whether to believe in it or not then what created me? as i have no ability to "believe" in a god." Just so you know i sat through 18 years of church with a you gotta be kidding me look on my face.

bodhi


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5487
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
bodhi smith wrote: I think

bodhi smith wrote:

 I think using symbolic logic.

 

What does this even mean?

 

You mean as in

 

->

<=>

\/

 

 

etc...?


bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
yep

I have to translate all human speech into symbolic logic equations.


bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
oops

bah... i hit enter...


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5487
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
bodhi smith wrote:I have to

bodhi smith wrote:

I have to translate all human speech into symbolic logic equations.

 

And here comes the obvious question:

 

What did you do before you learned the notation?

 

And as for the original question I don't see how that would prevent a God belief.


bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
hu?

I have no ability to "believe" only know.  If something is not true or false I have no facility to comprehend it.

Before I took a symbolic logic class in university I made up my own system of binary logic which i still use, i just use the term symbolic logic so that others have a point of reference.

bodhi


bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
btw

>=> not <=>


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5487
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
I have the opposite

I have the opposite problem.

 

I have to read symbolic notation several times to understand what it's saying.

 

And yes I learned it in university.

 

That said, I'm sure 'if and only if' is <=>


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Bodhi, I'm starting to not

Bodhi, I'm starting to not be surprised when new members turn out to have asperger's.  I am curious about your particular variant, though.  There are so many human communications that don't directly reduce to symbolic logic... do you have to extrapolate or reduce until you can get to a formula?  Are there a lot of sentences that just end up as gibberish to you? 

While I'm asking, do you understand facial expressions, or have you had to learn to analyze them based on kind of a mental checklist?

 

 


 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
iff

if and only if is generally a double sided arrow or three lines on top of one another like an = with a extra _

bodhi


bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
do I extrapolate: yes, after

do I extrapolate: yes, after 34 years I've gotten pretty good at it.

do lots of sentences end up as gibberish: oh yea... people use an enormous amount of assumptive logic in speech,  they assume i understand their frame of reference.

facial expressions: i analyze facial expressions like a computer, combining that with breathing rates, pupal dilation, skin flush and hand movements I'm basically a human lie detector.

bodhi


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote:facial expressions: i

Quote:
facial expressions: i analyze facial expressions like a computer, combining that with breathing rates, pupal dilation, skin flush and hand movements I'm basically a human lie detector.

Ever considered law enforcement, or even law?  I bet if you could empirically demonstrate your ability to detect lies, you could make big bucks as a "consultant" for law enforcement, lawyers, or maybe even just your average corporation.

Did you ever read "Dune," by Frank Herbert?  Wouldn't hurt any company to have a truthsayer.

 

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
addendum

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

I have the opposite problem.

 

I have to read symbolic notation several times to understand what it's saying.

 

And yes I learned it in university.

 

That said, I'm sure 'if and only if' is <=>

sorry pineapple, i found a exception. In computer typing <=> is used as Iff

plus i was making a logic joke (less than = less than) (more than = more than).

bodhi


bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit

Hambydammit wrote:

Quote:
facial expressions: i analyze facial expressions like a computer, combining that with breathing rates, pupal dilation, skin flush and hand movements I'm basically a human lie detector.

Ever considered law enforcement, or even law?  I bet if you could empirically demonstrate your ability to detect lies, you could make big bucks as a "consultant" for law enforcement, lawyers, or maybe even just your average corporation.

Did you ever read "Dune," by Frank Herbert?  Wouldn't hurt any company to have a truthsayer.

 

 

I did think about those things, unfortunately or fortunately for me I have ethics. Do you have any idea what they would do with someone like me.

Yes I've read "Dune" I like it. I don't scare people like the truthsayers, actually people tend to relax and expose all kind of things I wish they would keep to them-self.

 

bodhi


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
bodhi smith wrote:do I

bodhi smith wrote:

do I extrapolate: yes, after 34 years I've gotten pretty good at it.

do lots of sentences end up as gibberish: oh yea... people use an enormous amount of assumptive logic in speech,  they assume i understand their frame of reference.

facial expressions: i analyze facial expressions like a computer, combining that with breathing rates, pupal dilation, skin flush and hand movements I'm basically a human lie detector.

 

I find that hard to believe along with you having aspergers - to most of us facial expressions are anywhere from difficult to understand to completely impossible to even notice. I don't pick up on facial expressions, voice tone or gestures at all - I completely depend on the person's words to decide what they are saying. That's why I do better online.

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote:I did think about

Quote:
I did think about those things, unfortunately or fortunately for me I have ethics.

This opens up a whole new topic.  It's my well considered opinion that ethics are not entirely rational -- that is, much of what we believe is ethical is actually an expression of our emotional attachment to behaviors that are good for the genes, but not ultimately synonymous with the good of a society.

Have you considered that your ethics may be flawed due to a combination of your lack of ability to comprehend social nuance and the lack of ability by most humans to realize that emotions and deep instinctual drives do not necessarily equate to either greater or individual good?

(I'm not trying to convince you of anything.  I'm just really curious about how your brain works.)

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5487
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
I think I found my complete

I think I found my complete opposite.

 

I suck at reading comprehension (Let alone logical notation.), I can't 'read' people, and  I can't tell if somebody's lying to save my life.

 

 

Are you a guy? Are you cute?

 


bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote:bodhi

MattShizzle wrote:

bodhi smith wrote:

do I extrapolate: yes, after 34 years I've gotten pretty good at it.

do lots of sentences end up as gibberish: oh yea... people use an enormous amount of assumptive logic in speech,  they assume i understand their frame of reference.

facial expressions: i analyze facial expressions like a computer, combining that with breathing rates, pupal dilation, skin flush and hand movements I'm basically a human lie detector.

 

I find that hard to believe along with you having aspergers - to most of us facial expressions are anywhere from difficult to understand to completely impossible to even notice. I don't pick up on facial expressions, voice tone or gestures at all - I completely depend on the person's words to decide what they are saying. That's why I do better online.

Ok, we are different.

You're right about most aspies, but then again most people who are diagnosed with aspergers syndrome are really autistic. we could get into the differences between high function / low function aspergers, autisim and NT's but not here. I hope that's ok.

 

bodhi


bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote:Quote:I

Hambydammit wrote:

Quote:
I did think about those things, unfortunately or fortunately for me I have ethics.

This opens up a whole new topic.  It's my well considered opinion that ethics are not entirely rational -- that is, much of what we believe is ethical is actually an expression of our emotional attachment to behaviors that are good for the genes, but not ultimately synonymous with the good of a society.

Have you considered that your ethics may be flawed due to a combination of your lack of ability to comprehend social nuance and the lack of ability by most humans to realize that emotions and deep instinctual drives do not necessarily equate to either greater or individual good?

(I'm not trying to convince you of anything.  I'm just really curious about how your brain works.)

 

hu... I'm not sure what your asking. I am using the word ethics to describe a lack of want to see anyone hurt. From what I have observed law enforcement and law professionals are notoriously self serving. As are most corporations once they reach a particular size they become self re-enforcing for their own good.

Just like religions.

bodhi


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote:I am using the word

Quote:
I am using the word ethics to describe a lack of want to see anyone hurt.

If you've not read any of my author pages, I'm pretty heavy into Evolutionary Psychology, and I espouse the position that emotions are genes' way of getting us to do things that aren't necessarily good for us, but are good for the genes.  Ethics, or morality, is a general expression of the strongest of these emotional drives, mixed with the conclusions that derive from them as givens.

Because the interests of our genes and the interests of individuals and  of societies are often at odds with each other, ethics are far less than obvious in many situations.

I do, however, agree with you.  Law enforcement is adversarially related to those they are supposed to serve.

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote:I think

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

I think I found my complete opposite.

 

I suck at reading comprehension (Let alone logical notation.), I can't 'read' people, and  I can't tell if somebody's lying to save my life.

 

 

Are you a guy? Are you cute?

 

It's easy to tell if someone is lying, watch their body. People tend to touch there face if they are making something up, breathing becomes deeper, shoulders will roll inward, eye movement tends to move up and to the left, and in general they will close them-self off to you (cross their arms) as they are defending unconsciously. oh yea and pulse rate quickens.  This is not set in stone but it's a pretty good indicator that they are either lying or talking about something that is reveling.

Yes I am a guy. Am I cute: let me ask my roommate... she says "yea, too cute for your own good".

 

bodhi


jmm
Theist
jmm's picture
Posts: 837
Joined: 2007-03-03
User is offlineOffline
I believe in God because my

I believe in God because my daddy told me to. 


bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
jmm wrote:I believe in God

jmm wrote:

I believe in God because my daddy told me to. 

 

My daddy told me that also, I just looked at him like a dog trying to figure out why the sounds are coming out of a piano.

bodhi


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5487
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
bodhi smith wrote:Yes I am a

bodhi smith wrote:

Yes I am a guy. Am I cute: let me ask my roommate... she says "yea, too cute for your own good".

 

 

Was she lying?


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
I'm wondering what

I'm wondering what cpt_Pineapple looks like since she wont post her pic - Is she totally hot or ugly?

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote:bodhi

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

bodhi smith wrote:

Yes I am a guy. Am I cute: let me ask my roommate... she says "yea, too cute for your own good".

 

 

Was she lying?

no, but it is a subjective opinion.

bodhi


bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote:I'm

MattShizzle wrote:

I'm wondering what cpt_Pineapple looks like since she wont post her pic - Is she totally hot or ugly?

why are you asking me? ask her.

bodhi


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Hey fun bodhi,I can't

Hey fun bodhi,

I can't understand how anyone can't think that there is not "god", their very selves and all the rest if it.  Fucking silly words. "GAWED" fucking ourselves .... lost in the WHYS ! 

Dogs lick their crotch, but they don't suck their stuff, but we would .... in a pinch.

Words are for fixing ! Evolution till the end .... we are condemned to be what we are,

                                            gawed ....        

   Religion lies .....

  

 


PorkChop
Rational VIP!SuperfanSilver Member
Posts: 154
Joined: 2008-06-26
User is offlineOffline
jmm wrote:I believe in God

jmm wrote:

I believe in God because my daddy told me to. 

My dad told me there was Santa and the Easter Bunny, too. 

I don't always believe my dad.


jmm
Theist
jmm's picture
Posts: 837
Joined: 2007-03-03
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote:I'm

MattShizzle wrote:

I'm wondering what cpt_Pineapple looks like since she wont post her pic - Is she totally hot or ugly?

Probably somewhere in between. 


Loc
Superfan
Loc's picture
Posts: 1130
Joined: 2007-11-06
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote:Are you

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

Are you a guy? Are you cute?

We only found out Pineapple's a chick last week and she's already trying to hook up with guys.

I still find it really hard not to write male pronouns in relation to Pineapple :/

Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible

dudeofthemoment wrote:
This is getting redudnant. My patience with the unteachable[atheists] is limited.

Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3663
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
bodhi smith wrote:do I

bodhi smith wrote:

do I extrapolate: yes, after 34 years I've gotten pretty good at it.

do lots of sentences end up as gibberish: oh yea... people use an enormous amount of assumptive logic in speech,  they assume i understand their frame of reference.

facial expressions: i analyze facial expressions like a computer, combining that with breathing rates, pupal dilation, skin flush and hand movements I'm basically a human lie detector.

What an interesting condition to be "afflicted" with.  It seems to serve you well, in a manner of speaking.  I'm jealous.   I live with an acute anxiety disorder (  my amygdala gone haywire ? ) so my perpetual nervousness can make people think I'm lying even when I'm telling the truth.

I envy persons like yourself whose mental conditions actually seem to become an asset.  Incidentally, if given the choice I would prefer to be a person with schizoid personality disorder, a person whom experiences almost no emotion and who neither needs or desires the company of others....yet can still function quite well in society.

From visiting mental health forums and such I have discovered that persons with spd rarely seek treatment for their condition because they realize that this disorder confers a type of emotional invulnerability.  I should be so lucky.

( ps, welcome to the forum )

 


bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
Thanks for the love, I do

Thanks for the love,

I do actually want someone / anyone to give me an answer to the original question.

other than my dad said so

Why do you think there is a god?

bodhi


RhadTheGizmo
Theist
Posts: 1191
Joined: 2007-01-31
User is offlineOffline
Because "god" is consistent

Because "god" is consistent with the world I experience and it is preferable, to me, than the contrary belief.


bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
RhadTheGizmo wrote:Because

RhadTheGizmo wrote:

Because "god" is consistent with the world I experience and it is preferable, to me, than the contrary belief.

The head of the Harvard Divinity School once told me  "religion is the search for comfort". your answer fits with that sentiment.

bodhi


RhadTheGizmo
Theist
Posts: 1191
Joined: 2007-01-31
User is offlineOffline
Many praise-worthy things

Who am I to argue with the head of the Harvard Divinity School? 

I think that many praise-worthy things can be framed as "the search for comfort."  Therefore, I do not mind such a characterization.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
God is a "word game", as god

G-o-d is a "word game", as god does play ... but of No winners, No losers, as all is ONE.

     God Is.  I AM.  God is nothing MORE / LESS. 

     There is no choice regarding GOD, as YOU are what we are.

     Atheism is anti-theism, a rejection of theistic mythical gods. God is atheist / theist / and all the shades there in,  of the "word game choices" god plays.

      God is a comedian too ....

      Playing the "word game" is the sense of choice in this place of consciousness. 

      "Word Games" we play, and damn it can even get real ugly ..... yin yang.

As cool Alan Watts wrote: "The religion of Jesus was that he knew he was a son of God, and the phrase "son of " means "of the nature of," so that a son of God is an individual who realizes that he is, and always has been, one with God. "I and the Father are one." .......... and,  "Let this mind be in you." that is to say, let the same kind of [rational] consciousness be in you that was in Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ knew he was God."

"Wake up" [said a buddha] and find out eventually who you also really are [ god ]. In our culture of course, they'll say you're crazy or you're blasphemous, and they'll either put you in jail or in the nut house (which is the same thing). But if you wake up in India and tell your friends and relations, "My goodness, I've just discovered that I'm God," they'll laugh and say, "Oh, congratulations, at last you found out."

-   -  It's just another xlint angle at debunking the silly sad loony religious dogmatic god concepts.

 As I've said before in many varied word games, I am christ as you as all is one.

 Laughing, buddha asked, "what was that god question again?" ..... Then he continued laughing ..... Religious frantics also wished him dead , of course. Story Jesus wasn't so lucky. OUCH.

   

 

    

  


bodhi smith
Posts: 63
Joined: 2008-07-05
User is offlineOffline
RhadTheGizmo wrote:Who am I

RhadTheGizmo wrote:

Who am I to argue with the head of the Harvard Divinity School? 

I think that many praise-worthy things can be framed as "the search for comfort."  Therefore, I do not mind such a characterization.

That's good. I did not intend the statement as derogatory, I was just noting a pattern.

I would like it if you would extrapolate "search for comfort" and get back to me.

As I have no need to be comforted, I have no need for religion and would like to know what it's like.

I think this needs to be a new thread. I'll put it in kill-em with kindness.

bodhi


RhadTheGizmo
Theist
Posts: 1191
Joined: 2007-01-31
User is offlineOffline
Quote:That's good. I did not

Quote:
That's good. I did not intend the statement as derogatory, I was just noting a pattern.

Quote:
I would like it if you would extrapolate "search for comfort" and get back to me.

As I have no need to be comforted, I have no need for religion and would like to know what it's like.

Sidestepping a moment the issue of whether I think "a search for comfort" is the only need for religion...

When presented with a choice between vanilla and chocolate ice cream, how do you choose?

Quote:
I think this needs to be a new thread. I'll put it in kill-em with kindness.

Let me know if you actually do it.


GaiusJanus
GaiusJanus's picture
Posts: 20
Joined: 2008-07-08
User is offlineOffline
Quote: hu... I'm not sure

Quote:
hu... I'm not sure what your asking. I am using the word ethics to describe a lack of want to see anyone hurt. From what I have observed law enforcement and law professionals are notoriously self serving. As are most corporations once they reach a particular size they become self re-enforcing for their own good.

Your observations have led you to believe that self re-enforcing for one's own good is a bad thing. How do you determine if a thing is good or bad? Who/what decided a corporation's activities are bad/harmful?

 

Just another one who is curious as to how your brain works as another poster put it.

 

You would make a great poker player......

The last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument: "It came from god."


Ctrl Y
Theist
Posts: 73
Joined: 2007-05-19
User is offlineOffline
bodhi smith wrote:I have a

bodhi smith wrote:

I have a neural condition known as Asperger's Syndrome, because of that I think using symbolic logic. (not everyone with aspergers thinks like this I just happen to be wired this way) I can't understand how anyone can think that there is a "god".

Wow. What's that like? Wouldn't that make you more or less infallible? I don't want to come off as rude, that's just really interesting.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
And the definition of god is

And the definition of god is what again ???    Please humor me with your AWE .... but please don't scare me and hurt me ..... for your gawed ....


BMcD
Posts: 777
Joined: 2006-12-20
User is offlineOffline
GaiusJanus wrote:You would

GaiusJanus wrote:

You would make a great poker player......

Actually, what he's describing doing is more or less exactly what professional gamblers do: teach themselves to notice the small ticks and giveaways (ie: 'tells'). 'Normal' people have a subconscious capacity to empathize based on body language. Often, much of our impression of someone else's mood isn't a result of directly picking up visual cues and understanding the mood behind them with our brains so much as actually interpreting through our bodies. Instead of our brain saying 'I know what that posture means', what happens is the brain tells the body to run through a quick check of what set of chemical triggers (ie: what mood) would result in that kind of posture, by using miniscule releases. Once it hits the ones that seem right, the brain goes 'oh! Bob's feeling X' and nudges your conscious mind with that feedback.

What gamblers do, and what Bodhi seems to be describing, is actually training the conscious brain to watch for those same cues, but instead of the imprecise method most of us use, maintaining a limited (at least in the case of professional gamblers) catalog of 'what that means' in much the same way we maintain a similar catalog for letters and numbers. It's not easy to do, and I expect it was less so for Bodhi, especially if he's trying to maintain a much larger and more comprehensive mental catalog.

"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid


JillSwift
Superfan
JillSwift's picture
Posts: 1758
Joined: 2008-01-13
User is offlineOffline
RhadTheGizmo

RhadTheGizmo wrote:
Sidestepping a moment the issue of whether I think "a search for comfort" is the only need for religion...

When presented with a choice between vanilla and chocolate ice cream, how do you choose?

One chooses based on one's emotional preference. The subjective "like" and "dislike" (and all the shades in between) can be quantified to some extent and used in any logical approach to choice making.

To un-sidestep, I think "a search for comfort" is too strict a term for what I suspect is behind religion and spirituality: Preference.

This illustrates something I've observed over the years - that being that being religious or spiritual is rooted in an emotional response. Any rational/reason for it is added later.

This is one reason folks like Bodhi Smith and I have a rough time grasping the choice, being wired to see the world framed more in logic/rational thought than in emotional/social terms. (Bodhi more than I... much more.)

In itself this can't be a value judgement or it would be like claiming chocolate ice cream eaters are superior to vanilla ice cream eaters - utterly silly. It only becomes a problem when the chocolate ice cream brigade turns it into a value issue, and tries to supress vanilla on moral grounds.

"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray


RhadTheGizmo
Theist
Posts: 1191
Joined: 2007-01-31
User is offlineOffline
Quote:One chooses based on

Quote:
One chooses based on one's emotional preference. The subjective "like" and "dislike" (and all the shades in between) can be quantified to some extent and used in any logical approach to choice making.

Well.. if these things can be quantified to some extent.. why exactly can't "a search for comfort" as a reflection of a subjective "like" be quantified as well?

Quote:
To un-sidestep, I think "a search for comfort" is too strict a term for what I suspect is behind religion and spirituality: Preference.

I'm fine with that too.

Quote:
This illustrates something I've observed over the years - that being that being religious or spiritual is rooted in an emotional response. Any rational/reason for it is added later.

Kind of hard to observe.. considering such a large group of religious people were born into that religion.  How could you know whether the emotional side came before the rational/reason one?

Quote:
This is one reason folks like Bodhi Smith and I have a rough time grasping the choice, being wired to see the world framed more in logic/rational thought than in emotional/social terms. (Bodhi more than I... much more.)

I still don't quite understand how one can function in such a framework and still have preferences and subjective "like" and "dislikes."

Quote:
In itself this can't be a value judgement or it would be like claiming chocolate ice cream eaters are superior to vanilla ice cream eaters - utterly silly. It only becomes a problem when the chocolate ice cream brigade turns it into a value issue, and tries to supress vanilla on moral grounds.

Agreed.


JillSwift
Superfan
JillSwift's picture
Posts: 1758
Joined: 2008-01-13
User is offlineOffline
RhadTheGizmo wrote:Well.. if

RhadTheGizmo wrote:
Well.. if these things can be quantified to some extent.. why exactly can't "a search for comfort" as a reflection of a subjective "like" be quantified as well?
Yes, that was my point really.
RhadTheGizmo wrote:
Kind of hard to observe.. considering such a large group of religious people were born into that religion.  How could you know whether the emotional side came before the rational/reason one?
Discussion, by and large. People are amazingly open about thier spiritual/religious history.

My observations are, of course, not "scientific".

RhadTheGizmo wrote:
I still don't quite understand how one can function in such a framework and still have preferences and subjective "like" and "dislikes."
The brain is a multifaceted thing, so likes and dislikes still come from the same parts that generate emotional response in neuro-typicals. Depending on a variety of variables, these emotions may well be muted or simply processed differently, but are still used in subjective preference selection.

 

"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray


RhadTheGizmo
Theist
Posts: 1191
Joined: 2007-01-31
User is offlineOffline
Quote:The brain is a

Quote:
The brain is a multifaceted thing, so likes and dislikes still come from the same parts that generate emotional response in neuro-typicals. Depending on a variety of variables, these emotions may well be muted or simply processed differently, but are still used in subjective preference selection.

Then what exactly distinguishes this sort of framework from the "more normal" framework?

Quote:
This is one reason folks like Bodhi Smith and I have a rough time grasping the choice, being wired to see the world framed more in logic/rational thought than in emotional/social terms. (Bodhi more than I... much more.)

This statements seems to imply some chasm in between the way one group of people view the world and the way another.  But, the way you're explaining it, it doesn't seem so much as a chasm but merely that you and bodhi are on one point of a continuum of ways people view the world: from those who rely entirely on emotion; to those that rely on emotion and then add reason to it later; to those that feel emotion, possibly rely on it at times, and then add reason.


JillSwift
Superfan
JillSwift's picture
Posts: 1758
Joined: 2008-01-13
User is offlineOffline
RhadTheGizmo wrote:Then what

RhadTheGizmo wrote:
Then what exactly distinguishes this sort of framework from the "more normal" framework?

This statements seems to imply some chasm in between the way one group of people view the world and the way another.  But, the way you're explaining it, it doesn't seem so much as a chasm but merely that you and bodhi are on one point of a continuum of ways people view the world: from those who rely entirely on emotion; to those that rely on emotion and then add reason to it later; to those that feel emotion, possibly rely on it at times, and then add reason.

Weight in the decision process. For me, even strong emotions don't get a lot of weight in the decisions I make. Add to that an inability to make out facial expressions, a muted ability to function socially, and a muted ability to make out from body language/facial expression/verbal communication what other's emotional states are and you end up with an operational framework that is by nessesity more of a line of reasoning than it is the mix of emotion, instinct and reason that neuro-typicals have.

"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray


RhadTheGizmo
Theist
Posts: 1191
Joined: 2007-01-31
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Add to that an

Quote:
Add to that an inability to make out facial expressions, a muted ability to function socially, and a muted ability to make out from body language/facial expression/verbal communication what other's emotional states are and you end up with an operational framework that is by nessesity more of a line of reasoning than it is the mix of emotion, instinct and reason that neuro-typicals have.

Social awkwardness seems to be contrary to what I picked up from bodhi's explanation, but I could be wrong.

In anycase, I'm still having trouble contemplating this neuro-typical, non-typical, dichotomy.  "Muted ability to function socially," "make out facial expressions," muted ability to make out from body language/facial expresions/etc," do not seems like attributes that only come in on-and-off varieties.  There are many people I know who have varying levels of social aptitude, ability to make out facial expressions and make out emotional states. 

I don't mean any offense by my confusion.  To me, it just seems like saying there is a "neuro-typical" with regard to "receiving and acting upon emotions, operational frameworks based upon lines of reasoning rather than emotion/instinct," seems as ill-use of the phrase as using it to say there is a "aesthetically-typical" with regard to the color of people's skins.


JillSwift
Superfan
JillSwift's picture
Posts: 1758
Joined: 2008-01-13
User is offlineOffline
RhadTheGizmo wrote:Social

RhadTheGizmo wrote:
Social awkwardness seems to be contrary to what I picked up from bodhi's explanation, but I could be wrong.

In anycase, I'm still having trouble contemplating this neuro-typical, non-typical, dichotomy.  "Muted ability to function socially," "make out facial expressions," muted ability to make out from body language/facial expresions/etc," do not seems like attributes that only come in on-and-off varieties.  There are many people I know who have varying levels of social aptitude, ability to make out facial expressions and make out emotional states. 

I don't mean any offense by my confusion.  To me, it just seems like saying there is a "neuro-typical" with regard to "receiving and acting upon emotions, operational frameworks based upon lines of reasoning rather than emotion/instinct," seems as ill-use of the phrase as using it to say there is a "aesthetically-typical" with regard to the color of people's skins.

Well, first: neuro-typical and nuro-atypical are about physiology, not behavior. Us Aspies actually have notable differences in neural structure.

Second: I'm not talking black/white. When I say "muted ability to function socially" I don't mean like a shy person, who can be brought out of being shy by being re-exposed to social situations. I'm talking about consistent inability to pick up social cues no matter how much exposure they get, where social interaction must be taught like one teaches math to folks. That is to say - "When A happens, try to respond with B".

So, given any range of social skills, Aspies are going to be statistical outliers.

"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray


RhadTheGizmo
Theist
Posts: 1191
Joined: 2007-01-31
User is offlineOffline
I suppose it's possible..

I suppose it's possible.. and, admittedly, I don't know much about it.  My responses were more a reflection of my difficulty in comprehending the separation, i.e., how one distinguishes between an aspie and merely a individual who has the "muted ability," or whether, alternatively, all people with the "muted ability" are aspeis (or something to that effect).

I'll read up on it. Smiling