Naked Science Forum
General Science => General Science => Topic started by: smart on 25/12/2015 12:43:10
-
The existence of a God or homosexuality gene may provide evidences that pseudo-scientific racism has evolved into genetics. This raise fundamental issues on the nature of humans: Is faith and religion determined by genes? Are mental disorders caused by genetics ?
Moreover, synthetic biology may put forward a genetic genocide through advancement of eugenics into society. Is therefore genetic determinism limiting social justice through biological racism ? I believe science should promote the outcomes of genetic diversity and not create discrimination by manipulation of DNA.
-
create discrimination by manipulation of DNA
Would Therapeutic Genetics create discrimination, or reduce it?
If it were one day possible to treat, or perhaps cure Cystic Fibrosis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cystic_fibrosis) by genetic surgery, would the victim (or his family or medical fund) feel that they had been discriminated against, or that they had been helped?
-
Would Therapeutic Genetics create discrimination, or reduce it?
If it were one day possible to treat, or perhaps cure Cystic Fibrosis by genetic surgery, would the victim (or his family or medical fund) feel that they had been discriminated against, or that they had been helped?
Obviously the high price for such technology (CRISPR) would make gene editing not accessible to the poors. Thus it could create discrimination between the peoples who can afford genetic surgery and thoses who can't.
-
The existence of a God or homosexuality gene may provide evidences that pseudo-scientific racism has evolved into genetics. This raise fundamental issues on the nature of humans: Is faith and religion determined by genes? Are mental disorders caused by genetics ?
Moreover, synthetic biology may put forward a genetic genocide through advancement of eugenics into society. Is therefore genetic determinism limiting social justice through biological racism ? I believe science should promote the outcomes of genetic diversity and not create discrimination by manipulation of DNA.
If genes define our attributes, since DNA is natural, then it follows that nature is defining these differences, making racism, as you call it, natural. Artificial selection is different and is based on wanting to alter the natural DNA along some subjective human line of mass conformity. This is not natural.
The differentiation of new species begins with changes and differences. If we, as humans, could have taken the first animals and tighten all their genetics, so they are all like perfect clones, today, there would only be one species, not human. The appearance of human depended on changes and differences. These differences often make the group or herd separate; ugly duckling, thereby allowing the new genetic trait an opportunity to blossom and not become a backcross that disappears.
Social engineering, which is pseudo-science, is where unnatural appears. It attempts to create an imaginary and irrational place for the mind; pet rock, where natural differences are considered unnatural. In that world the rock and dog are the same. In nature, these two are separate and the natural human mind can see this is the case.
-
Amateur video & bad in grammar, but promise the point are amazing!!
This video will answering your question.
Theory of Albert Einstein, Sigmund Freud, Stephen Hawking, Sam Harris, Nikola Tesla, Budha, John Lennon, Werner Heisenberg.
Explain everything about universe, fate / destiny, psychology, free will, energy, quantum physics & mechanic.
Whatever we are to be now.. we maybe become rich people, poor people, priest, criminal, smart, idiot, etc.
we're all be a person what we should to be..
this video good for all human around the world, spesialy for poor people, sad, sick, dying, depresive & hopeless people :)
We can't make everybody in the world become wealth & rich, but we can make everybody around the world become grateful & happiness..
whatever we are become, BE GRATEFUL!!!!
Please share this video means, this is our destiny.. this is our fate..
Don't forget to see similar video on my playlist. Thanks :)
-
Is faith and religion determined by genes?
Obviously not, since they have to be taught. The exceptionally long period of maturation of humans does lead to a susceptibility to believe in the supernatural, but I know of no evidence of e.g.separated twins spontaneously inventing identical religions.
Are mental disorders caused by genetics ?
There is evidence of genetic susceptibility but environment appears to be the stronger determinant in later life.
-
Is faith and religion determined by genes?
Obviously not, since they have to be taught. The exceptionally long period of maturation of humans does lead to a susceptibility to believe in the supernatural, but I know of no evidence of e.g.separated twins spontaneously inventing identical religions.
Whats your take on the God gene (VMAT2) hypothesis ? Could it be possible to delete this gene to reduce fundamentalism in a given population?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_gene
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21778282
-
Is faith and religion determined by genes?
Obviously not, since they have to be taught. The exceptionally long period of maturation of humans does lead to a susceptibility to believe in the supernatural, but I know of no evidence of e.g.separated twins spontaneously inventing identical religions.
Are mental disorders caused by genetics ?
There is evidence of genetic susceptibility but environment appears to be the stronger determinant in later life.
Humans are the only animal that practices the behavior called religion. All animal behavior comes from personality firmware, which are defined by our genes. This very modern religious aspect of being human, separates humans from the rest of animal behavior. Leaning a particular religion is connected to the needs of a specific religion. However, the propensity for religion, is natural human and may be due to genetics. Atheism does not appear to have this propensity and therefore appears to have more in common with the rest of the non-human critters.
I would guess that the religion genes are connected to the imagination aspects of the brain; frontal lobe. This is the aspect of the mind that allows will power and choice. Our imagination is not limited to cause and affect and can break away from the natural cause and affect of the genetic based animal instinct.
An animal will react to a situation based on their instincts. If we add the human imagination as a wild card, the imagination allows one to read the situation in a subjective way. When we react to the subjective situation, based on instinct, the cause and affect of the reaction is no longer natural; new choice.
For example, if I see a wolf, a natural animal reaction may be to seek a defensive position. On the other hand, say I see the same wolf, but instead of seeing a predator, my imagination feels a sense of awe for its beauty. I am not running or hiding, but seeking to approach the wolf like a precious jewel or a beautiful sunset. This is irrational, but my imagination created a new choice that may have no precedent in animal instinct. Say the wolf feels my calm awe for him. He is confused and does not feel threat nor does he sense me as prey. We become friends. I have become a transcendent being.
Religions allow people to exercise this very modern part of the human brain, that animals don't have. It is the instinctive feeling of being true to oneself, that perpetuates religion. Atheists may well lack this gene, which could explain why they can't relate to it. This also explains why acting more like an animal is more natural to atheism.
God serves the purpose of exercising this new propensity, since God implies something outside natural reality and our sensory systems. There is is a total detachment from natural instinct; transcendent. The lion will lie with the lamb.
-
Whats your take on the God gene (VMAT2) hypothesis ? Could it be possible to delete this gene to reduce fundamentalism in a given population?
Einstein's definition of insanity is repeating the same action in the hope of getting a different result. I think this describes most religious practices. Fundamentalism is clearly an acquired insanity since it always relates to a written text, can usually be traced to a single nonfamilial source of infection, any particular brand of fundamentalism can infect people of widely differing genetic makeup, and small differences in very similar texts can cause lethal conflict between nominally similar fundies.
-
You are mistaking genetic predisposition for real world reality. A genetic predisposition does not guarantee a particular outcome.
-
Just as well, otherwise we'd all be as irrational and homicidal as believers.
-
Whats your take on the God gene (VMAT2) hypothesis ? Could it be possible to delete this gene to reduce fundamentalism in a given population?
Einstein's definition of insanity is repeating the same action in the hope of getting a different result. I think this describes most religious practices. Fundamentalism is clearly an acquired insanity since it always relates to a written text, can usually be traced to a single nonfamilial source of infection, any particular brand of fundamentalism can infect people of widely differing genetic makeup, and small differences in very similar texts can cause lethal conflict between nominally similar fundies.
Repeating the same action in the hope of getting a different result is also called practice makes perfect. The figure skater or basketball player will do the same routines, again and again, seeking perfection. Wishing to be the best you can be is not insane, except in a world of lazy people.
Humans are the only animal or vegetable species that practices the behavior we call religion. I cannot think of any other species on the earth that gathers together and then tries to exist outside of sensory cause and affect. Maybe someone can think of an example. The existence of atheists implies not all humans appear to have this gene. This gene can't be a regressive gene or else lower life forms would have it. It appears to be a progressive gene, which separates humans into two branches, with one branch having more in common with animals; both lack this gene.
Belief in God and/or the supernatural, implies a conscious connection to things that cannot be seen with the five senses. This suggests the gene(s) forms a connection to internal perception via the imagination. Some religions use drugs to induce altered states of mind. The Navajo Medicine man may eat peyote to hear and see spirits. In practical terms, he is using the drugs to activate the imagination and aspects of the unconscious mind, so he can observe that which is not part of sensory reality, but will be a unique experience for one person. This is transcendent.
The invention of the I-Pad, for example, was not something one could reason based on our sensory systems and the world what already was. It is based on an extrapolation of the mind beyond known sensory cause and affect. It needs the unique vision of the medicine man. This is what makes humans, transcendent. Those who lack the gene may not be able to appreciate the utility. They appear to fear it. This fear is inferred by their inability to just live and let live. Instead it is taboo and needs to be destroyed less it the bogey man spread like a virus.
Genetics and racism may have a cause and affect connection, since the lack of this gene in one group and its inclusion in the other, would leads to two different skill sets and a potential lack of empathy for the POV of the other. The religion gene allows transcendence or a way to escape the normal cause and affect of this genetic racism. Like the medicine man, one can see an ethereal image through the mind's eye, where we are all part of the same family tree. We transcend racism. Martin Luther King of civil rights was a preacher; medicine man.
-
The invention of the I-Pad, for example, was not something one could reason based on our sensory systems and the world what already was.
Something like a tablet computer was used in the original series of "Star Trek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_The_Original_Series)", filmed in the 1960s.
That certainly made for an interesting discussion when a couple of vendors went to court because someone had stolen someone's concept.
-
Repeating the same action in the hope of getting a different result is also called practice makes perfect. The figure skater or basketball player will do the same routines, again and again, seeking perfection.
No! A thousand tmes no! If he repeated the same action, he'd get the same result, because basketballs and ice are really dumb and just obey the laws of physics. Practice is (or should be) a process of refinement, not repetition*. Airplanes are dumb too. I practice instrument approaches, doing something a bit different every time (even if the difference is subconscious) and thus getting closer to "nailing the beam". If I consciously flew each one exactly like the first wobbly attempt, in the hope that the plane would eventually relent and land itself, I'd have passengers, instructors, examiners and traffic controllers queing up to burn my licence!
The best insult to come my way was from the conductor of a brass band. He addressed the bass section thus "Gentlemen, the purpose of rehearsal is for me to interpret the composer's thoughts, not for you to consolidate your misreading of his music."
Cynic, moi? No, call it Jewish heritage (yes, it's genetic!). After 6000 years of disappointment one wonders whether repetitive prayer and strict observance really pays off.
*I'll qualify that a bit. Once you have refined a process to an acceptable level of precision, repetition can transfer some or all of the process from intellectual to autonomic or "muscle memory", but you won't win many prizes by autonomising a substandard skill.
-
You are mistaking genetic predisposition for real world reality. A genetic predisposition does not guarantee a particular outcome.
Schizophrenia is a artificially created psychological disorder.
-
Cynic, moi? No, call it Jewish heritage (yes, it's genetic!). After 6000 years of disappointment one wonders whether repetitive prayer and strict observance really pays off.
Jews did not exist until the exile; Israelites did not exist until Israel about −1200; Abraham and Moshe did not exist at all.
-
You can't exile people who don't exist.
-
Humans are the only animal that practices the behavior called religion. All animal behavior comes from personality firmware, which are defined by our genes. This very modern religious aspect of being human, separates humans from the rest of animal behavior.
So you're somehow equating religion or religious imagination with any form of learning or abstract thinking? Do you not think it was more likely to be the other way around, that abstract thinking allowed for religion, which was an early attempt to make sense of world, explain why things happen, and formalize rules for social behavior?
Leaning a particular religion is connected to the needs of a specific religion. However, the propensity for religion, is natural human and may be due to genetics. Atheism does not appear to have this propensity and therefore appears to have more in common with the rest of the non-human critters.
There's a difference between rejection of theism and having no conception of at all of deities and supernatural concepts. My cat, as far as I know, does not believe in God, but not for the reasons that atheists don't believe in God.
I would guess that the religion genes are connected to the imagination aspects of the brain; frontal lobe. This is the aspect of the mind that allows will power and choice. Our imagination is not limited to cause and affect and can break away from the natural cause and affect of the genetic based animal instinct.
An animal will react to a situation based on their instincts. If we add the human imagination as a wild card, the imagination allows one to read the situation in a subjective way. When we react to the subjective situation, based on instinct, the cause and affect of the reaction is no longer natural; new choice.
For example, if I see a wolf, a natural animal reaction may be to seek a defensive position. On the other hand, say I see the same wolf, but instead of seeing a predator, my imagination feels a sense of awe for its beauty. I am not running or hiding, but seeking to approach the wolf like a precious jewel or a beautiful sunset. This is irrational, but my imagination created a new choice that may have no precedent in animal instinct. Say the wolf feels my calm awe for him. He is confused and does not feel threat nor does he sense me as prey. We become friends. I have become a transcendent being.
Religions allow people to exercise this very modern part of the human brain, that animals don't have. It is the instinctive feeling of being true to oneself, that perpetuates religion. Atheists may well lack this gene, which could explain why they can't relate to it. This also explains why acting more like an animal is more natural to atheism.
How so? What's your evidence that atheists are more animal like? Are you claiming atheists are less ethical? Less reasonable? Less creative? More impulsive? Less empathetic or altruistic? Unappreciative of aesthetics? What is it atheists are lacking, and how is it a disadvantage or defect?
God serves the purpose of exercising this new propensity, since God implies something outside natural reality and our sensory systems. There is is a total detachment from natural instinct; transcendent. The lion will lie with the lamb.
Again, do you believe religion is the only means to exercise abstract thinking or to moderate or over ride instinctive impulses?
-
Humans are the only animal or vegetable species that practices the behavior we call religion.
Repetitive behaviour with no obvious reward, including selfharming behavior, is fairly common among birds and mammals. You don't see many examples because it is usually fatal in the wild and treated by sedation or slaughter in domestic animals, though obsessive dogs and cats can be retrained as chemical sensors.
The existence of atheists implies not all humans appear to have this gene.
Not all religions or religious behaviour are theistic. Buddhism is the prime counterexample, and there are plenty of animistic beliefs that don't ascribe deistic characteristics to the supernatural.
This gene can't be a regressive gene or else lower life forms would have it. It appears to be a progressive gene, which separates humans into two branches, with one branch having more in common with animals; both lack this gene.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Your statement has no foundation. And since the only evidence is irrational behaviour, it runs contrary to observation.
-
You can't exile people who don't exist.
The exile made the folk. Also note that Jews refer to a religion rather than Israelites to a race.
-
But who was exiled? Did the Egyptians make a random selection among themselves to create a new nation, or did they pick on a specific group? If the latter, what was the identifying feature or peculiar history of that group? If they weren't the descendants of native Egyptians, where had they come from in the first place?
-
I mean the Babylonian exile, not the fictional Egyptian exodus. IIRC Israelites were Canaanites all along.
-
Babylonian Exile, also called Babylonian Captivity, the forced detention of Jews in Babylonia following the latter's conquest of the kingdom of Judah in 598/7 and 587/6 bc.
The date and place, fictitional or real, are irrelevant. On 24 January, before the witneses here assembled, you stated
Jews did not exist until the exile;
which is clearly nonsense - you can't exile people who don't exist.