Friam

God

Classic

List

Threaded

22 messages Options

Prof David West

God

Taking (inhaling) DMT seems to induce a belief in "higher spirits" e.g. "God."

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0269881120916143

Since human brains naturally produce DMT (some controversy about this assertion); that is why all human cultures — historic and prehistoric — incorporate beliefs in the supernatural.

davew

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

thompnickson2

Re: God

Wait a minute?

What is the function of believing in higher spirits?

Or is it a spandrel?

N

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Prof David West
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 6:23 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [FRIAM] God

Taking (inhaling) DMT seems to induce a belief in "higher spirits" e.g. "God."

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0269881120916143

Since human brains naturally produce DMT (some controversy about this assertion); that is why all human cultures — historic and prehistoric — incorporate beliefs in the supernatural.

davew

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Prof David West

Re: God

Who said anything about a function?

A simple observation: every culture of which we are aware express some sort of belief in the supernatural - there is marginal consistency among expressions of that belief. Burials with artifacts / food stuffs / staged body positioning / etc. are interpreted as expressions of supernatural belief in prehistoric cultures. Again just an observation, no interpretation, no assignment of meaning, no explantation.

davew

On Wed, May 20, 2020, at 10:22 AM, [hidden email] wrote:

> Wait a minute?
>
> What is the function of believing in higher spirits?
>
> Or is it a spandrel?
>
> N
>
> Nicholas Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
> Clark University
> [hidden email]
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Prof David West
> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 6:23 AM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [FRIAM] God
>
> Taking (inhaling) DMT seems to induce a belief in "higher spirits" e.g. "God."
>
> https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0269881120916143
>
> Since human brains naturally produce DMT (some controversy about this
> assertion); that is why all human cultures — historic and prehistoric —
> incorporate beliefs in the supernatural.
>
> davew
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-.
> . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe
> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-.
> . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>

thompnickson2

Re: God

Ok. But I can ask "why", right?

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Prof David West
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 3:29 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God

Who said anything about a function?

A simple observation: every culture of which we are aware express some sort of belief in the supernatural - there is marginal consistency among expressions of that belief. Burials with artifacts / food stuffs / staged body positioning / etc. are interpreted as expressions of supernatural belief in prehistoric cultures. Again just an observation, no interpretation, no assignment of meaning, no explantation.

davew

On Wed, May 20, 2020, at 10:22 AM, [hidden email] wrote:

> Wait a minute?
>
> What is the function of believing in higher spirits?
>
> Or is it a spandrel?
>
> N
>
> Nicholas Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University
> [hidden email] https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Prof David West
> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 6:23 AM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [FRIAM] God
>
> Taking (inhaling) DMT seems to induce a belief in "higher spirits" e.g. "God."
>
> https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0269881120916143
>
> Since human brains naturally produce DMT (some controversy about this
> assertion); that is why all human cultures — historic and prehistoric —
> incorporate beliefs in the supernatural.
>
> davew
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-.
> . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe
> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-.
> . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Frank Wimberly-2

Re: God

"God, do I exist?" "And who is asking?" Not relevant but I found it funny when I first heard it.

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 3:36 PM <[hidden email]> wrote:

Ok. But I can ask "why", right?

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Prof David West
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 3:29 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God

Who said anything about a function?

A simple observation: every culture of which we are aware express some sort of belief in the supernatural - there is marginal consistency among expressions of that belief. Burials with artifacts / food stuffs / staged body positioning / etc. are interpreted as expressions of supernatural belief in prehistoric cultures. Again just an observation, no interpretation, no assignment of meaning, no explantation.

davew

On Wed, May 20, 2020, at 10:22 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
> Wait a minute?
>
> What is the function of believing in higher spirits?
>
> Or is it a spandrel?
>
> N
>
> Nicholas Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University
> [hidden email] https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Prof David West
> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 6:23 AM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [FRIAM] God
>
> Taking (inhaling) DMT seems to induce a belief in "higher spirits" e.g. "God."
>
> https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0269881120916143
>
> Since human brains naturally produce DMT (some controversy about this
> assertion); that is why all human cultures — historic and prehistoric —
> incorporate beliefs in the supernatural.
>
> davew
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-.
> . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe
> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-.
> . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918

Prof David West

Re: God

In reply to this post by thompnickson2

Certainly. I apologize if I implied otherwise.

"What is the function of that?" seems to be a strange question — a disguise for a different type of question like, "what is the evolutionary advantage?

My reaction to the article was along the lines: Does DMT, at the micro-dose level in the human brain, contribute a biological evolutionary advantage along the lines of nuanced sensitivity — helping make more precise distinctions to sensory input and therefore increase survival odds in some subtle way. The belief in "Other" or "God" is just a side effect?

Fast forward a few millennia and the side-effect that had little or no consequence vis-a-vis biological evolution suddenly becomes a vulnerability —a contra-survival trait— in terms of socio-cultural evolution?

[Yes, I am being a bit sloppy and or metaphorical as I toss about the the term evolution.]

davew

On Wed, May 20, 2020, at 3:36 PM, [hidden email] wrote:

> Ok. But I can ask "why", right?
>
> Nicholas Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
> Clark University
> [hidden email]
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Prof David West
> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 3:29 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
>
> Who said anything about a function?
>
> A simple observation: every culture of which we are aware express some
> sort of belief in the supernatural - there is marginal consistency
> among expressions of that belief. Burials with artifacts / food stuffs
> / staged body positioning / etc. are interpreted as expressions of
> supernatural belief in prehistoric cultures. Again just an observation,
> no interpretation, no assignment of meaning, no explantation.
>
> davew
>
>
> On Wed, May 20, 2020, at 10:22 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
> > Wait a minute?
> >
> > What is the function of believing in higher spirits?
> >
> > Or is it a spandrel?
> >
> > N
> >
> > Nicholas Thompson
> > Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University
> > [hidden email] https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Prof David West
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 6:23 AM
> > To: [hidden email]
> > Subject: [FRIAM] God
> >
> > Taking (inhaling) DMT seems to induce a belief in "higher spirits" e.g. "God."
> >
> > https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0269881120916143
> >
> > Since human brains naturally produce DMT (some controversy about this
> > assertion); that is why all human cultures — historic and prehistoric —
> > incorporate beliefs in the supernatural.
> >
> > davew
> >
> > -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-.
> > . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe
> > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> >
> >
> > -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-.
> > . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> >
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-.
> . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-.
> . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>

Steve Smith

Re: God

My own "just so" story about belief in the supernatural is that it
provides ballast to an emerging/evolving mind (on top of an evolving
neural system including the development of language and planning
functions) which becomes somewhat obsessive about "posing questions and
finding answers".   I tend to think of the pervasive belief in the
supernatural as a way to resolve those questions which are simply too
subtle or complex or to whose resolution is too subtle or obscured to
yield to "rational" answers.   I suspect it is also a useful place to
build ill-formed hypotheses... theories that just don't hold water (yet)
and need to be scaffolded by actions of "the gods" or equivalent.
While I find *other's* various superstitious beliefs inconvenient to
deal with sometime, I think they hold a significant utility for both
individual and group, but it is their nature, just like *scientific*
beliefs (although not JUST like) to be overturned as understanding expands.

On 5/21/20 8:44 AM, Prof David West wrote:

> Certainly. I apologize if I implied otherwise.
>
> "What is the function of that?" seems to be a strange question — a disguise for a different type of question like, "what is the evolutionary advantage?
>
> My reaction to the article was along the lines: Does DMT, at the micro-dose level in the human brain, contribute a biological evolutionary advantage along the lines of nuanced sensitivity — helping make more precise distinctions to sensory input and therefore increase survival odds in some subtle way. The belief in "Other" or "God" is just a side effect?
>
> Fast forward a few millennia and the side-effect that had little or no consequence vis-a-vis biological evolution suddenly becomes a vulnerability —a contra-survival trait— in terms of socio-cultural evolution?
>
> [Yes, I am being a bit sloppy and or metaphorical as I toss about the the term evolution.]
>
> davew
>
>
> On Wed, May 20, 2020, at 3:36 PM, [hidden email] wrote:
>> Ok. But I can ask "why", right?
>>
>> Nicholas Thompson
>> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
>> Clark University
>> [hidden email]
>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Prof David West
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 3:29 PM
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
>>
>> Who said anything about a function?
>>
>> A simple observation: every culture of which we are aware express some
>> sort of belief in the supernatural - there is marginal consistency
>> among expressions of that belief. Burials with artifacts / food stuffs
>> / staged body positioning / etc. are interpreted as expressions of
>> supernatural belief in prehistoric cultures. Again just an observation,
>> no interpretation, no assignment of meaning, no explantation.
>>
>> davew
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 20, 2020, at 10:22 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>> Wait a minute?
>>>
>>> What is the function of believing in higher spirits?
>>>
>>> Or is it a spandrel?
>>>
>>> N
>>>
>>> Nicholas Thompson
>>> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University
>>> [hidden email] https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Prof David West
>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 6:23 AM
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Subject: [FRIAM] God
>>>
>>> Taking (inhaling) DMT seems to induce a belief in "higher spirits" e.g. "God."
>>>
>>> https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0269881120916143
>>>
>>> Since human brains naturally produce DMT (some controversy about this
>>> assertion); that is why all human cultures — historic and prehistoric —
>>> incorporate beliefs in the supernatural.
>>>
>>> davew
>>>
>>> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-.
>>> . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe
>>> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>>
>>> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-.
>>> . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>>>
>> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-.
>> . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>>
>>
>> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-.
>> . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>

Jochen Fromm-5

Re: God

In reply to this post by Prof David West

Daniel Dennett writes in "Breaking the spell" that philosophy asks questions that may not have answers while religion proposes answers that may not be questioned.

-J.

-------- Original message --------

From: Prof David West <[hidden email]>

Date: 5/21/20 16:46 (GMT+01:00)

To: [hidden email]

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God

Russell Standish-2

Re: God

In reply to this post by Prof David West

The theory which makes some sense to me is that we humans (as social
creatures) have evolved to anthropomorphise. This make sense for
dealing with other humans, who might be competitors, or
compatriots. And the modelling makes use of a remarkable trick -
observe one's own mind, and use those observations to model somebody
else's mind. This explains why we have self-awareness, if not
consciousness.

The thing is, the same trick also works quite well with other animals,
who may be predators or prey, irrespective of whether other species
actually have minds or not.

So it makes sense that when some relatively rare phenomenon occurs,
perhaps a thunderstorm, that the alpha male stands up and makes
threatening noises. And it seems to work when the thunder goes away

eventually. And so the thunderstorm has been anthropomorphised. This
got extended to other phenomenon, eg famines get blamed on angry gods
who can be appeased by making the appropriate offerings. Eventually
con-artists exploited this with ever more elaborate stories that
leveraged this innate tendency to anthromorphise. I'm sure astrology
started out as a cunning plan to garner research funds for early
astonomers from ignorant kings.

Like most evolutionary stories, this is a "just so" story. But I think
it has a grain of truth.

Cheers, Russell

--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders [hidden email]
http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

thompnickson2

Re: God

Hi Russ,

Hawking my wares again. I am sorry but SOMEBODY has to read this crap. The argument of this paper is that the flow of inference is actually in the other direction. We model our view of ourselves on our experience with others.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Russell Standish
Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2020 9:39 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God

The theory which makes some sense to me is that we humans (as social

creatures) have evolved to anthropomorphise. This make sense for dealing with other humans, who might be competitors, or compatriots. And the modelling makes use of a remarkable trick - observe one's own mind, and use those observations to model somebody else's mind. This explains why we have self-awareness, if not consciousness.

The thing is, the same trick also works quite well with other animals, who may be predators or prey, irrespective of whether other species actually have minds or not.

So it makes sense that when some relatively rare phenomenon occurs, perhaps a thunderstorm, that the alpha male stands up and makes threatening noises. And it seems to work when the thunder goes away

eventually. And so the thunderstorm has been anthropomorphised. This got extended to other phenomenon, eg famines get blamed on angry gods who can be appeased by making the appropriate offerings. Eventually con-artists exploited this with ever more elaborate stories that leveraged this innate tendency to anthromorphise. I'm sure astrology started out as a cunning plan to garner research funds for early astonomers from ignorant kings.

Like most evolutionary stories, this is a "just so" story. But I think it has a grain of truth.

Cheers, Russell

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)

Principal, High Performance Coders [hidden email]

http://www.hpcoders.com.au

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Prof David West

Re: God

The book i promoted at vFRIAM - Excellent Beauty by Eric Dietrich does a good job of dealing with the question "why religion" AND "why science?" Pretty much the same question.

Anyone aware of a religion that claims an afterlife that is other than "eternal damnation" or "eternal bliss." Some kind of existence that is not basically static. I have been looking and yet to find one. Different nuances of course, but all basically claiming a static state. BTW this includes the static state of "nothingness."

Mormonism is an exception, but I and trying to find if it is the only one.

davew

On Sat, May 23, 2020, at 9:59 PM, [hidden email] wrote:

Hi Russ,

Hawking my wares again. I am sorry but SOMEBODY has to read this crap. The argument of this paper is that the flow of inference is actually in the other direction. We model our view of ourselves on our experience with others.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Russell Standish
Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2020 9:39 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God

The theory which makes some sense to me is that we humans (as social
creatures) have evolved to anthropomorphise. This make sense for dealing with other humans, who might be competitors, or compatriots. And the modelling makes use of a remarkable trick - observe one's own mind, and use those observations to model somebody else's mind. This explains why we have self-awareness, if not consciousness.

The thing is, the same trick also works quite well with other animals, who may be predators or prey, irrespective of whether other species actually have minds or not.

So it makes sense that when some relatively rare phenomenon occurs, perhaps a thunderstorm, that the alpha male stands up and makes threatening noises. And it seems to work when the thunder goes away

eventually. And so the thunderstorm has been anthropomorphised. This got extended to other phenomenon, eg famines get blamed on angry gods who can be appeased by making the appropriate offerings. Eventually con-artists exploited this with ever more elaborate stories that leveraged this innate tendency to anthromorphise. I'm sure astrology started out as a cunning plan to garner research funds for early astonomers from ignorant kings.

Like most evolutionary stories, this is a "just so" story. But I think it has a grain of truth.

Cheers, Russell

--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Russell Standish                    Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders     [hidden email]
                      http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Gary Schiltz-4

Re: God

Not a religion per se, but reincarnation seems anything but static.

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 7:39 AM Prof David West <[hidden email]> wrote:

The book i promoted at vFRIAM - Excellent Beauty by Eric Dietrich does a good job of dealing with the question "why religion" AND "why science?" Pretty much the same question.

Anyone aware of a religion that claims an afterlife that is other than "eternal damnation" or "eternal bliss." Some kind of existence that is not basically static. I have been looking and yet to find one. Different nuances of course, but all basically claiming a static state. BTW this includes the static state of "nothingness."

Mormonism is an exception, but I and trying to find if it is the only one.

davew

On Sat, May 23, 2020, at 9:59 PM, [hidden email] wrote:
Hi Russ,

Hawking my wares again. I am sorry but SOMEBODY has to read this crap. The argument of this paper is that the flow of inference is actually in the other direction. We model our view of ourselves on our experience with others.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Russell Standish
Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2020 9:39 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God

The theory which makes some sense to me is that we humans (as social
creatures) have evolved to anthropomorphise. This make sense for dealing with other humans, who might be competitors, or compatriots. And the modelling makes use of a remarkable trick - observe one's own mind, and use those observations to model somebody else's mind. This explains why we have self-awareness, if not consciousness.

The thing is, the same trick also works quite well with other animals, who may be predators or prey, irrespective of whether other species actually have minds or not.

So it makes sense that when some relatively rare phenomenon occurs, perhaps a thunderstorm, that the alpha male stands up and makes threatening noises. And it seems to work when the thunder goes away

eventually. And so the thunderstorm has been anthropomorphised. This got extended to other phenomenon, eg famines get blamed on angry gods who can be appeased by making the appropriate offerings. Eventually con-artists exploited this with ever more elaborate stories that leveraged this innate tendency to anthromorphise. I'm sure astrology started out as a cunning plan to garner research funds for early astonomers from ignorant kings.

Like most evolutionary stories, this is a "just so" story. But I think it has a grain of truth.

Cheers, Russell

--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Russell Standish                    Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders     [hidden email]
                      http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Russell Standish-2

Re: God

In reply to this post by thompnickson2

On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 09:59:37PM -0600, [hidden email] wrote:
> Hi Russ,
>
>
>
> Hawking my wares again. I am sorry but SOMEBODY has to read this crap. The
> argument of this paper is that the flow of inference is actually in the other
> direction. We model our view of ourselves on our experience with others.
>

What paper? What argument?

--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders [hidden email]
http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

thompnickson2

Re: God

Sorry Russ. It was in a hyperlink:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311349078_The_many_perils_of_ejecti
ve_anthropomorphism

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Russell Standish
Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 4:27 PM
To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God

On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 09:59:37PM -0600, [hidden email] wrote:
> Hi Russ,
>
>
>
> Hawking my wares again. I am sorry but SOMEBODY has to read this
> crap. The argument of this paper is that the flow of inference is
> actually in the other direction. We model our view of ourselves on our
experience with others.
>

What paper? What argument?

--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders [hidden email]
http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ...
... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

-- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Russell Standish-2

Re: God

Hi Nick - finally took a look at your paper. I didn't read it to the nth detail, but from what I understand, your scepticism about "ejective anthropmorphism" (nice term by the way) stands on two legs:

1) What exactly is priveleged about introspection?

2) That the process of ejective anthropomorphism starts from an
identity between the target behaviour and the observers behaviour,
which is structy false. The example being given of a dog scratching at
a door to get in.

In response, I would say there is plenty of privelege in
introspection. For example, proprioception is entirely priveleged -
that information is simply now available to external observers.

In terms of the identity of target and observer behaviour, it doesn't
need to be identical, but it does need to be analogical. The most
important application of this skill is prediction of what other human
beings do. People aren't the same, but they are similar - and human
society functions because we can predict to some extent what other
people are likely to do. I believe this is why self-awareness evoved
in the first place. Something similar may have evolved in dogs, which
are social pack animals. We have also evolved the ability to "put
ourselves in somebody else's skin", taking into account the obvious
external differences. So we can imagine being a dog, and wanting to
get through a door, what would we do. We know we cannot stand up, and
turn the door knob, because we don't have hands, so what would we do,
given we only have paws. Scratching behaviour does seem a likely
behaviour then. That, then is analogical.

So, I'm not exactly convinced :).

Cheers

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 04:32:05PM -0600, [hidden email] wrote:

> Sorry Russ. It was in a hyperlink:
>
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311349078_The_many_perils_of_ejecti
> ve_anthropomorphism
>
> Nicholas Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
> Clark University
> [hidden email]
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Russell Standish
> Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 4:27 PM
> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
>
> On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 09:59:37PM -0600, [hidden email] wrote:
> > Hi Russ,
> >
> >
> >
> > Hawking my wares again. I am sorry but SOMEBODY has to read this
> > crap. The argument of this paper is that the flow of inference is
> > actually in the other direction. We model our view of ourselves on our
> experience with others.
> >
>
> What paper? What argument?
>
>
> --
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
> Principal, High Performance Coders [hidden email]
> http://www.hpcoders.com.au
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ...
> ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe
> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Jochen Fromm-5

Re: God

Nick your article reminds of Elizabeth Culotta. She says in her Science article that anthropomorphism is a natural property of humans that contributed to the rise of religions. She quotes Oxford University psychologist Justin Barrett who argues that "Humans have a tendency to see signs of agents—minds like our own—at work in the world" and Yale University psychologist Paul Bloom who says "We have a tremendous capacity to imbue even inanimate things with beliefs, desires, emotions, and consciousness,... and this is at the core of many religious beliefs".

Elizabeth Culotta, On the Origin of Religion, Science (2009) Vol. 326, Issue 5954, 784-787

-J.

-------- Original message --------

From: Russell Standish <[hidden email]>

Date: 6/28/20 10:12 (GMT+01:00)

To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God

> Sorry Russ. It was in a hyperlink:
>
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311349078_The_many_perils_of_ejecti
> ve_anthropomorphism
>
> Nicholas Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
> Clark University
> [hidden email]
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Russell Standish
> Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 4:27 PM
> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
>
> On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 09:59:37PM -0600, [hidden email] wrote:
> > Hi Russ,
> >
> >
> >
> > Hawking my wares again. I am sorry but SOMEBODY has to read this
> > crap. The argument of this paper is that the flow of inference is
> > actually in the other direction. We model our view of ourselves on our
> experience with others.
> >
>
> What paper? What argument?
>
>
> --
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dr Russell Standish                    Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
> Principal, High Performance Coders     [hidden email]
>                       http://www.hpcoders.com.au
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ...
> ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe
> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Russell Standish                    Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders     [hidden email]
                      http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

thompnickson2

Re: God

In reply to this post by Russell Standish-2

Hi, russ,

Thanks for that careful reading. There is no greater kindness than to take the time to read colleague’s work.

I will think carefully about what you say.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm
Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2020 3:08 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God

-J.

-------- Original message --------

From: Russell Standish <[hidden email]>

Date: 6/28/20 10:12 (GMT+01:00)

To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God

> Sorry Russ. It was in a hyperlink:
>
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311349078_The_many_perils_of_ejecti
> ve_anthropomorphism
>
> Nicholas Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
> Clark University
> [hidden email]
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Russell Standish
> Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 4:27 PM
> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
>
> On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 09:59:37PM -0600, [hidden email] wrote:
> > Hi Russ,
> >
> >
> >
> > Hawking my wares again. I am sorry but SOMEBODY has to read this
> > crap. The argument of this paper is that the flow of inference is
> > actually in the other direction. We model our view of ourselves on our
> experience with others.
> >
>
> What paper? What argument?
>
>
> --
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dr Russell Standish                    Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
> Principal, High Performance Coders     [hidden email]
>                       http://www.hpcoders.com.au
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ...
> ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe
> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Frank Wimberly-2

Re: God

In reply to this post by Russell Standish-2

Russ,

Your views on these matters are very similar to my own.

Frank

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 2:11 AM Russell Standish <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi Nick - finally took a look at your paper. I didn't read it to the nth detail, but from what I understand, your scepticism about "ejective anthropmorphism" (nice term by the way) stands on two legs:

1) What exactly is priveleged about introspection?

2) That the process of ejective anthropomorphism starts from an
identity between the target behaviour and the observers behaviour,
which is structy false. The example being given of a dog scratching at
a door to get in.

In response, I would say there is plenty of privelege in
introspection. For example, proprioception is entirely priveleged -
that information is simply now available to external observers.

In terms of the identity of target and observer behaviour, it doesn't
need to be identical, but it does need to be analogical. The most
important application of this skill is prediction of what other human
beings do. People aren't the same, but they are similar - and human
society functions because we can predict to some extent what other
people are likely to do. I believe this is why self-awareness evoved
in the first place. Something similar may have evolved in dogs, which
are social pack animals. We have also evolved the ability to "put
ourselves in somebody else's skin", taking into account the obvious
external differences. So we can imagine being a dog, and wanting to
get through a door, what would we do. We know we cannot stand up, and
turn the door knob, because we don't have hands, so what would we do,
given we only have paws. Scratching behaviour does seem a likely
behaviour then. That, then is analogical.

So, I'm not exactly convinced :).

Cheers

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 04:32:05PM -0600, [hidden email] wrote:
> Sorry Russ. It was in a hyperlink:
>
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311349078_The_many_perils_of_ejecti
> ve_anthropomorphism
>
> Nicholas Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
> Clark University
> [hidden email]
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Russell Standish
> Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 4:27 PM
> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
>
> On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 09:59:37PM -0600, [hidden email] wrote:
> > Hi Russ,
> >
> >
> >
> > Hawking my wares again. I am sorry but SOMEBODY has to read this
> > crap. The argument of this paper is that the flow of inference is
> > actually in the other direction. We model our view of ourselves on our
> experience with others.
> >
>
> What paper? What argument?
>
>
> --
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
> Principal, High Performance Coders [hidden email]
> http://www.hpcoders.com.au
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ...
> ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe
> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders [hidden email]
http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Jochen Fromm-5

Re: God

I am not sure I agree with the arguments from you Russ. You say "People aren't the same, but they are similar - and human society functions because we can predict to some extent what other people are likely to do [...]. We have also evolved the ability to 'put ourselves in somebody else's skin', taking into account the obvious external differences."

But we cannot predict what someone else will do, only if we know the person really well - for instance if it is your wife or husband for 30 years. In whodunit films it becomes clear in the end why people have acted they way they did, but only in hindsight. In hindsight we almost always can say why people acted the way they did, but we cannot predict it beforehand. You say hindsight is 20/20 for this in English, right?

We also haven't evolved the ability to "put ourselves in somebody else's skin". It is not impossible, but can be very difficult and requires detailed knowledge and imagination. This is the reason why Hollywood has invented cinemas to show us how what it is like to be somebody else (the GoPro cameras in modern days have the same function).

Therefore I tend to disagree with both statements.

-J.

-------- Original message --------

From: Frank Wimberly <[hidden email]>

Date: 6/28/20 15:07 (GMT+01:00)

To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God

Russ,

Your views on these matters are very similar to my own.

Frank

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 2:11 AM Russell Standish <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi Nick - finally took a look at your paper. I didn't read it to the nth detail, but from what I understand, your scepticism about "ejective anthropmorphism" (nice term by the way) stands on two legs:

1) What exactly is priveleged about introspection?

2) That the process of ejective anthropomorphism starts from an
identity between the target behaviour and the observers behaviour,
which is structy false. The example being given of a dog scratching at
a door to get in.

In response, I would say there is plenty of privelege in
introspection. For example, proprioception is entirely priveleged -
that information is simply now available to external observers.

In terms of the identity of target and observer behaviour, it doesn't
need to be identical, but it does need to be analogical. The most
important application of this skill is prediction of what other human
beings do. People aren't the same, but they are similar - and human
society functions because we can predict to some extent what other
people are likely to do. I believe this is why self-awareness evoved
in the first place. Something similar may have evolved in dogs, which
are social pack animals. We have also evolved the ability to "put
ourselves in somebody else's skin", taking into account the obvious
external differences. So we can imagine being a dog, and wanting to
get through a door, what would we do. We know we cannot stand up, and
turn the door knob, because we don't have hands, so what would we do,
given we only have paws. Scratching behaviour does seem a likely
behaviour then. That, then is analogical.

So, I'm not exactly convinced :).

Cheers

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 04:32:05PM -0600, [hidden email] wrote:
> Sorry Russ. It was in a hyperlink:
>
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311349078_The_many_perils_of_ejecti
> ve_anthropomorphism
>
> Nicholas Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
> Clark University
> [hidden email]
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Russell Standish
> Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 4:27 PM
> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] God
>
> On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 09:59:37PM -0600, [hidden email] wrote:
> > Hi Russ,
> >
> >
> >
> > Hawking my wares again. I am sorry but SOMEBODY has to read this
> > crap. The argument of this paper is that the flow of inference is
> > actually in the other direction. We model our view of ourselves on our
> experience with others.
> >
>
> What paper? What argument?
>
>
> --
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
> Principal, High Performance Coders [hidden email]
> http://www.hpcoders.com.au
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ...
> ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe
> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
>
> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders [hidden email]
http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Russell Standish-2

Re: God

In reply to this post by Frank Wimberly-2

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 04:06:01PM +0200, Jochen Fromm wrote:

> I am not sure I agree with the arguments from you Russ. You say "People aren't
> the same, but they are similar - and human society functions because we can
> predict to some extent what other people are likely to do [...]. We have also
> evolved the ability to 'put ourselves in somebody else's skin', taking into
> account the obvious external differences."
>
> But we cannot predict what someone else will do, only if we know the person
> really well - for instance if it is your wife or husband for 30 years. In
> whodunit films it becomes clear in the end why people have acted they way they
> did, but only in hindsight. In hindsight we almost always can say why people
> acted the way they did, but we cannot predict it beforehand. You say hindsight
> is 20/20 for this in English, right?

Leave a $100 bill on a park bench. What do you predict the next person
to sit at that seat will do?

Yes - someone you know well will be more predictable - my wife says so!

I might also predict that if I disturb a magpie's nest, the bird will
attack me.

Also humans have the ability to reason what others predict they might
do (3rd order reasoning), and deliberately do a contrary thing if that
games the interaction. Not many other species have that ability (some
other great apes have been shown to reason that way, IIRC, but that's
about it). But humans are also capable of seeing through that sort of
deceit too, via 4th order reasoning, but that recursive capability
maxes out at 5th order IIUC.

I would say most humans are actually quite predictable most of the
time. But some are distinctly less so, and quite possibly successful
as a result. Donald Trump is probably like this. He comes up with a
lot of crazy stuff, so it's really hard to figure out what he's
thinking.

>
> We also haven't evolved the ability to "put ourselves in somebody else's skin".
> It is not impossible, but can be very difficult and requires detailed knowledge
> and imagination. This is the reason why Hollywood has invented cinemas to show
> us how what it is like to be somebody else (the GoPro cameras in modern days
> have the same function).
>

Contrariwise, in a game where an object is hidden in one spot, then
when a person leaves the room, and the object is moved to another
spot. Upon returning to the room, where do you think that person will
start looking for the object. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally–Anne_test

Apparently, children under the age of 4 have difficulty with this
task, but older humans successfully see the situation from someone
else's point of view. So yes, the task is difficult, and undoubtedly
requires detailed knowledge, but adult humans are able to do this with ease.

> Therefore I tend to disagree with both statements.
>
> -J.
>

Maybe we don't disagree, but just misunderstand each other :).

--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders [hidden email]
http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/