Hey vesp you asked a few questions in the 4/20 thread about some human behavioral traits, like 'altruism' and why we do 'things to help others' when there appears to be no (immediate) benefits to doing so, or put another way no  "fruits for our labors"

    I wanted to give you this torrent link but couldn't find it at the time and IMO posting this comment and link, in the 4/20 thread (even though that's where you first asked these questions)  would have just confused things, and as this reply would've been almost completely 'off topic'.

    And as these are such  good questions that don't really have any 'shorter' answers than the basic ones I posted in the 4/20 thread,  to give them the respect they deserved, I started them a thread of their own     I figured a fresh start was appropriate 

    You may have heard of Richard Dawkins, he's a professor of Zoology* at Oxford Uni.  he has researched many of these behavioral 'traits',  including 'altruistic behaviour' as they  fascinate him, and in a couple of these docos, he explains at length the logical 'evolutionary benefits'  of altruism.  (btw altruism is seen all about in nature, not just in humans!)
     
   Scientific in his approach these are documentaries full of well thought out ideas and thoroughly researched information

    Richard Dawkins is a good presenter, smart, likeable and easy to watch 

   recommended to all wasps   enjoy!
 
  http://thepiratebay.se/torrent/5135399/Richard_Dawkins_-_The_Television_Documentari

 *(zoo+ology=zooology hmmm sp?) 

  what?  salat  don't tell me you are a god botherin creationist noooooo 

it's all about 'how' our behaviours and responses have come to be via evolution and natural selection, and altruism came about because it enhances our chances of evolutionary success. Simple 

Good Lord No!  I'm not any particular religion at all although Buddist comes nearer the truth

phew! 

It's complicated!

lol yeah it is    I agree with much of what you say,, especially about food and the 'completeness' of things affecting their quality.

Personally I can really notice the difference in pot as well as food  and imo  there is a noticeable difference between the effects of indoor and outdoor pot 

 I also agree science can be way too clinical and not leave room for the unknown to be incorporated. A perfect example of this is accupuncture, why it works is cannot be 'scientifically' explained from a western perspective, but it does 'work' AND the effects are reproducible 

  IMO western science is quite arrogant in the way it considers to 'know' so much when there are gaping holes in some basic knowledge and understanding

. Evolution has no emotion it's all about 'what works' so I think it's pretty cool is that characteristics like kindness and altruism (beyond the family unit) have evolved over hundreds of thousands of years BECOZ they helped us as 'individuals' in the short term as well as to thrive as a species in the long term 

you're right it's complicated!   

The methods of science are good for what they accomplish, however they are not complete, this is where the arrogance of some scientists like Richard Dawkins irritates me.

arrogance? not to me 

How does or can it distinguish between true altruism and that which is evolutionary in nature?

what do you mean by 'true altruism?'

  Alttruism is altruism!  It's where a being consciously does something for no immediate reward and no guarantee of any rewards in the future.,
 
  It's basically taking a chance BUT as einstein once said, and most agree,  "nature doesn't play dice" it DOESNT take 'chances' it does what works.  Here lies the rub It doesn't 'make sense' from an 'evolutionary' pov but it happens all over the shop!

How would science measure that?

science has always been limited by the scientist Neccessity is the mother of invention

I'm not sure I understand your grievances towards the man  He is only talking about an idea which HAS progressed from being a 'theory' to being 'fact'

 The biggest 'opponent' of evolution is also the biggest opponent of free speech, the catholic church with it's anachronistic teaching of 'creationism' which together with many of its so called 'teachings'
  It IS one of the worst the scourges of mankind with it's (literally)  'fantastic beliefs'  Gimme HIV anyday over religion 

 A worse case of indocrination and basic brainwashing with unprovable bullshit has never been seen 

  At least buddhism doesnt have any deities like christianity and try and profess to "know god", to be able to 'communicate' with 'it' (him? esp IF you are 'in the chuch' a priest or higher) and 'see his handiwork' all around 
   
  these types of delusions are downright dangerous and yet they ARE supported by many so called 'scientists' following a variety of "religions"
 
  which begs the question "just exactly what do 'they' call 'science' and how DO they study something scientifically?"

     coz they can't surely be talking about the science I'm thinking of with its 'reproducible results' which evolution has and religion doesnt

  IMO buddhism is primarily concerned with ones pov , how that affects your life and it provides ideas on how to think and how to get 'control' of  ones thoughts through various ways.
 
   this knowledge and the abilty to use it has a myriad of 'benefits' not the least being greater 'peace of mind' which stems from being able to 'decide' how to think and not having 'unwanted' thoughts.

   I am a huge believer in this 'thought system'' value, having personally obtained much benefit an all ways from its teachings.

I can envision any number of plausible scenarios where some form of creationism as well as evolution could both be true.

 If by this you are saying that some 'being' snapped their fingers and life appeared, sorry imo No Way! seriously c'mon you don't believe that...really?

  IMO 'science' in most of its form has a long way to go,, I think their are a number of 'fundamentals' of nature which we have failed to comprehend properly and as we do we will learn a HUGE amount,, with amazing results. I have no doubts.

 I would have thought you would've known this about me salat,  the forum conspirator and tinfoil hatter

hmmm I guess I'm a religious scientist

f1

A perfect example of this is accupuncture, why it works is cannot be 'scientifically' explained

This is the type of thinking that gives rise to religion. "Science has not yet explained how it works; therefore it is impossible for science to ever explain how it works; therefore it must be the work of God; now kneel in awe of the Almighty Allah and destroy the infidels."

Suppose something happens but once in the entirety of the universe, suppose it cannot be measured in any way known to science and suppose it is not repeatable.

If it cannot be measured how would it effect us (or anything for that matter)? Isn't that what measuring devices do? They measure the effects that particles/waves/forces have on other particles/waves/forces.

That is consciousness and human experience.

Consciousness can be explained by science though. For example when we sleep certain parts of the brain turn off, same with when we are knocked unconscious or anaesthetized with drugs. If my brain is not conscious, the world does not stop turning for the other 7 billion humans. Evolution has made us egocentric.

At least buddhism doesnt have any deities like christianity and try and profess to "know god", to be able to 'communicate' with 'it'

Yes but that is why Christianity is #1 and Buddhism is #5. Christianity has more control over the reward and fear centers of the brain. Eternal damnation and torture can be a scary deterrent, and we're social animals so our brains reward us if we walk into a room full of smiling happy people.

This is the type of thinking that gives rise to religion. "Science has not yet explained how it works; therefore it is impossible for science to ever explain how it works; therefore it must be the work of God; now kneel in awe of the Almighty Allah and destroy the infidels."

   Ok firstly I'd like to point out fresh is an 'atheist' in the literal sense of the word...I Do Not 'believe' or think there is a 'deity' or 'God'
 Whether or not fresh thinx there are extremely powerful conscious entities 'capable' of behaving in such a way, is another thing altogether

I cant say I agree with this statement...I think 'organised religion' succeeds through "indoctrination' which IS a very effective form of 'brainwashing' where children are "taught to believe"  untruths/lies by their parents and teachers, who also have been taught these untruths/lies by their parents and teachers, and so on so forth ad infinitum ad nauseum!

 These 'belief systems' let people "think they knew what they didn't"  'God' takes care of the 'details' and due to the basic 'ignorance' of "the common people" they are easy to control which when combined with their limited education and little opportunity for getting any, especially a formal one, means these people stayed forever ignorant of most of the things, we today 'take for granted' and this left them vulnerable and easily tricked by those with 'more' knowledge, who were usually the people in charge.

   "faith"  plays such a HUGE part becoz "faith" is 'believing' in the unproven, unsubstantiated 'opinions' of the 'leaders' of the tribe, who don't always have altruistic intentions and
 "knowledge is Power"  and this 'power' is then used to control all the other people. Slavery was once common.
Howz it go? "Power corrupts and Absolute Power corrupts Absolutely"
 
  This is the primary reason the 'intelligentsia' are hunted down by those who dont want their own "ruling opinions" to be 'challenged' and 'disappear' those people who are able to, the teachers scientists and other educated people. And coz they are also people who can teach others. And now with curiosity and a computer you can almost learn about anything  
     Man TPTB  don't like what the internet's done  

   (We are currently seeing the result of a few 'powerful and corrupt' peoples efforts with "our planet", which has mainly and most widespreadly occurred post WW2, but it's been happening forever, ever since one man 'wanted control over' another for whatever reasons  
 
    Faark the VERY FIRST 'war on drugs' was BY the British against the Chinese in the Opium Wars of the 19th century.. Amazing story of the attitude of these 'powerful people' (the East India Co and friends, the mob who I currently call TPTB) and what they were prepared to DO to 'get their way' ... worth checking out)   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars

  This is why 'originally' the 'church' (ALL 'churches') didn't want the average man getting his hands on knowledge of ANY kind which might undermine their (assumed) 'power'  which was maintained by the peoples  "ignorance"  and then the  people "having faith the Pope knows what he's talking about" 

Only the the Pope and Royalty were supposed to have full access to the knowledge (and power) of the church until science came along and 'proved' that Kings and Priests weren't the only people who could "understand Gods work" by studying the natural world, and went along until Charles Darwin proposed the (no longer a 'theory' of) Evolution which turned the WHOLE circus on its head and this is 'why' science and religion became and are in most ways diametrically opposed   Religion doesn't like the idea of being measured


"knowledge" was once the 'priviledge' of the church/es and wealthy men...the average person just didn't have the time necessary to 'study' or learn things outside their immediate reality, which was usually based on staying alive and making a living.

Most (if not ALL) the 'great scientists' post the renaissance came from wealthy families and had received top educations.  Science was not a 'hobby' for the poor, and a 'hobby' it was back in those days.

The 'Industrial Revolution' advanced engineering significantly but things like chemistry were still truly in their infancy   Kekule onle sussed out the structure of benzene in 1865! which wasn't proven ttill 1930 something IIRC

Yes but that is why Christianity is #1 and Buddhism is #5. Christianity has more control over the reward and fear centers of the brain.

Again I'd beg to differ...I consider 'religions' to be 'deity based' (they have a 'God' or 3) and they have 'Rules' like The Ten Commandments and the like

Buddhism has No 'gods' and 'suggests' (it doesn't 'tell' you)  "ALL the answers are to be found within yourself" and there are no 'rules' when it comes to searching yourself.

In fresh's opinion the 'point' of a 'belief system' is to make like easier not harder!  Based on this 'measure'   I'd say Buddhism has the most satisfied customers!

Science cannot measure what it does not know about - it can only measure those things it recognizes.  Any sufficiently advanced technology is no different from magic.  No measurement is independent of the taker of the measurement

pretty much exactly my opinion too

How would you go about explaining x-rays to a caveman?

Man! imagine just taking a 'loaded' mp3 player, or even better a portable DVD player back to the 1950's..I'm sure you'd blow a few minds

sorry for the rave but you both raised interesting points worthy of reply

yes I agree with most of what you say salat 

   the scientific standard seems to have lapsed and faltered in this mad world hell bent on 'growth' of business...

it truly scares me what is done 'in the name of science' these daze GM crops and worse (like making an 'airborne' version of H1N1 to study ) to the amount of 'useless' compounds being made for industrial purposes!

There's a saying that " 80% of todays 'science' goes into repairing the problems caused by 'science past'  "    kinda  makes ya wonder