Hi

[Baruch]

Hey, buddy, I can help you out.  You have one just like the rest of us.

But my avatar is of a three dimensional person.  Her's is a line drawing.

[Cavebear]

Oh lord...someone went off and broke Brauch......crap....who the fuck is gonna clean up this?

He has been "broken" the couple of years I've been here.  Maybe all the time he has been here before me.

But as far as "cleaning up", well YOU are the Moderator...

[Hydra009]

Survival is very important BL but progress is even more important.

Kinda hard to make progress when you're dead, though.

Of course if you reckon that ..................no living thing is more highly evolved than another..........then I imagine that you wouldn't mind to be an animal or a plant or even a prehistoric man.

No one gets to choose their birth, so preferences are irrelevant.  You might as well ask people which planet they'd like to live on or what time period they'd like to grow up in.

And yes, all living organisms are equally evolved - they all have a chain of ancestors going back to the earliest life on the planet, life that diversified and changed over the aeons to adapt to wide range of habitats and changing conditions, especially the threats and opportunities posed by other ever-changing species.

You've misconceptualized evolution as some sort of progressive process with the goal of producing increasingly sophisticated consciousnesses.  This is not remotely the case.  For starters, biology has no teleology, no end goal.  Survival is what matters.  If it confers an evolutionary advantage for a cavefish population to lose its eyes, that's what's going to happen.  Second, consciousness/intelligence, while a hell of a successful adaption (so far) might not end all that well for us.  Meanwhile, cyanobacteria keep chugging along, oblivious to the rise and fall of humanity.  Humans are the only sentient species on Earth out of a ton of similarly-endowed primates which all went extinct.  If evolution is trying to crank out sentience, it's doing a remarkably poor job.

[Blackleaf]

No one gets to choose their birth, so preferences are irrelevant.  You might as well ask people which planet they'd like to live on or what time period they'd like to grow up in.

And yes, all living organisms are equally evolved - they all have a chain of ancestors going back to the earliest life on the planet, life that diversified and changed over the aeons to adapt to wide range of habitats and changing conditions, especially the threats and opportunities posed by other ever-changing species.

You've misconceptualized evolution as some sort of progressive process with the goal of producing increasingly sophisticated consciousnesses.  This is not remotely the case.  For starters, biology has no teleology, no end goal.  Survival is what matters.  If it confers an evolutionary advantage for a cavefish population to lose its eyes, that's what's going to happen.  Second, consciousness/intelligence, while a hell of a successful adaption (so far) might not end all that well for us.  Meanwhile, cyanobacteria keep chugging along, oblivious to the rise and fall of humanity.  Humans are the only sentient species on Earth out of a ton of similarly-endowed primates which all went extinct.  If evolution is trying to crank out sentience, it's doing a remarkably poor job.

It's funny. Throughout the many years of evolution, convergent evolution has resulted in many different species adopting similar traits independently. Especially after a mass extinction event, life will rapidly diversify to fill the niches that were made vacant. Humans, however, are quite unique. The only other species I'm aware of that has been even slightly similar to us has been the neanderthal, and they were just apes who shared a common ancestor with us. No lizards have ever been like us. No birds have ever been like us. Humans are in a niche of their own making. Like you said, if we're the end goal of evolution, evolution is not doing a very good job.

[Cavebear]

Hydra makes a good [point.  Evolution is not directional, nor toward a point.  There is no "intent".

And Blackleaf is also correct.  Humans are quite unique.

Those are not contradictory thoughts...

[Baruch]

It's funny. Throughout the many years of evolution, convergent evolution has resulted in many different species adopting similar traits independently. Especially after a mass extinction event, life will rapidly diversify to fill the niches that were made vacant. Humans, however, are quite unique. The only other species I'm aware of that has been even slightly similar to us has been the neanderthal, and they were just apes who shared a common ancestor with us. No lizards have ever been like us. No birds have ever been like us. Humans are in a niche of their own making. Like you said, if we're the end goal of evolution, evolution is not doing a very good job.

Neanderthals had limited culture and were cold adapted.  Modern humans were equatorial in origin, and only slightly more cultural.  Your model is prejudiced.

Cro-magnon art happened after inter-breeding between Neanderthals and modern humans.  That is where the leap in culture happened, on accident.  Modern humans on their own had only achieved limited rock art (San people).  Modern people (with or without Neanderthal additions) are monkeys, who share a common ancestor the with superior Homo Erectus ancestor, who was around on their own for 500,000 years.  This happened because they didn't overburden the environment.  The hybrid version (and the culturally adapted pure modern humans) are a mega-extinction event.  Is that superior?  Does Twitter actually demonstrate progress, or a beau jeste of a self destructive species?

[Cavebear]

Neanderthals had limited culture and were cold adapted.  Modern humans were equatorial in origin, and only slightly more cultural.  Your model is prejudiced.

Cro-magnon art happened after inter-breeding between Neanderthals and modern humans.  That is where the leap in culture happened, on accident.  Modern humans on their own had only achieved limited rock art (San people).  Modern people (with or without Neanderthal additions) are monkeys, who share a common ancestor the with superior Homo Erectus ancestor, who was around on their own for 500,000 years.  This happened because they didn't overburden the environment.  The hybrid version (and the culturally adapted pure modern humans) are a mega-extinction event.  Is that superior?  Does Twitter actually demonstrate progress, or a beau jeste of a self destructive species?

Your nonsense is really very tiresome.

Just about the simple stuff...

1.  The Cro-Magnon Africans were doing obvious art before they ever met a Neanderthal.
2.  The San are simply where more ancient people were, and have no positive connection to the old rock paintings.
3.  But that doesn't really matter because Early Homo Sapiens left Africa long before that.
4.  Modern homo sapiens art predates Neanderthal contact.
5.  "Modern people (with or without Neanderthal additions) are monkeys".  You have to be a half wit-theist to think THAT.    Seriously...

I'm glad I'm not you.

[Mr.Obvious]

But my avatar is of a three dimensional person.  Hers is a line drawing.

Oh My God!



He's not wrong!

[Arik]

Kinda hard to make progress when you're dead, though.

Where is the evidence that people die?
Have you ever seen a dead consciousness next to a dead body?

No one gets to choose their birth, so preferences are irrelevant.  You might as well ask people which planet they'd like to live on or what time period they'd like to grow up in.

Guessing again Hydra?
You keep on pretending that your guesses are evidence when in reality stay guesses.
It is more likely that your consciousness follow you wherever you go so if you are a fair person your dreams and your expectations will eventuate into a future life.
There are thousand of example in which small children are so clever even if nobody teach them anything.
You may wonder where they learned those skills.
Take Mozart and Beethoven.
At the age of 3 or 4 Mozart and 6 or 7 Beethoven they were already skilled enough to give their first concert.
Obviously they learned those skills in previous lives.

And yes, all living organisms are equally evolved - they all have a chain of ancestors going back to the earliest life on the planet, life that diversified and changed over the aeons to adapt to wide range of habitats and changing conditions, especially the threats and opportunities posed by other ever-changing species.

More guesses Hydra.
Nobody is equal to anybody else.
Diversity is the norm.
Life is like a run to the treasure hunt.
You can not expect that everybody get there at the same time.

You've misconceptualized evolution as some sort of progressive process with the goal of producing increasingly sophisticated consciousnesses.  This is not remotely the case.  For starters, biology has no teleology, no end goal.  Survival is what matters.  If it confers an evolutionary advantage for a cavefish population to lose its eyes, that's what's going to happen.  Second, consciousness/intelligence, while a hell of a successful adaption (so far) might not end all that well for us.  Meanwhile, cyanobacteria keep chugging along, oblivious to the rise and fall of humanity.  Humans are the only sentient species on Earth out of a ton of similarly-endowed primates which all went extinct.  If evolution is trying to crank out sentience, it's doing a remarkably poor job.

Everybody survive Hydra.
Consciousness and energy are the two sides of the same sheet and because energy is behind destruction also consciousness is.
What really happen according to me is that those who are not able to keep up with the fast race will end up in a different race in which they can compete.
It is like a mosaic tiles.
A particular tile can only fit in a particular mosaic

[Arik]

Hydra makes a good [point.  Evolution is not directional, nor toward a point.  There is no "intent".

And Blackleaf is also correct.  Humans are quite unique.

Those are not contradictory thoughts...

Plenty of guesses CB.

As the destiny of a simple drop of water is to end up (down) into the ocean to become the ocean itself also our destiny is to end up in a different ocean in order to become that ocean ourselves.

Gravity may make sure that a drop of water end in a ocean of water but for humans a different form of gravity do the job.
This is what people will learn when they will realize that physical science lead them nowhere.

[trdsf]

Aaaand there it is, all-out Deepak Chopra mode, except even less coherent. I'm impressed, in a slightly nauseated way, that was even possible.

[Baruch]

Your nonsense is really very tiresome.

Just about the simple stuff...

1.  The Cro-Magnon Africans were doing obvious art before they ever met a Neanderthal.
2.  The San are simply where more ancient people were, and have no positive connection to the old rock paintings.
3.  But that doesn't really matter because Early Homo Sapiens left Africa long before that.
4.  Modern homo sapiens art predates Neanderthal contact.
5.  "Modern people (with or without Neanderthal additions) are monkeys".  You have to be a half wit-theist to think THAT.    Seriously...

I'm glad I'm not you.

French caves in Central Africa ... who knew!

Or maybe you think Wakanda was real?  Maybe San people had the only Earth source of Unobtanium?

Not knocking San people, they were incredible until we domesticated them in my generation.  They are no longer able to hunt prehistoric style, and are on reservations.

https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/noma/hd_noma.htm  ... like other early modern people.  Neanderthals before integration, not so much.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal_behavior#Claims_of_art_and_adornment ... no essay at my favorite Art Museum for Neanderthals, because there isn't much to show, other than stone tools.

https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/lasc/hd_lasc.htm ... Cro-Magnon were already integrated non-Equatorial people.  Many Equatorial Africans never intermarried with Neanderthals, because after 20,000 BCE, they didn't exist.

But continue to hate on anyone not Sub-Saharan African if you want to.

Here is easy access to all of pre-historic art images at the Met ...
https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/keywords/prehistoric-art/

[aitm]

Where is the evidence that people die?

There....in a nutshell. Pretty much lays bare the crux of the boys whole thesis. The grandest of human arrogance. That humans don't die like "other" creatures. We are "special". No evidence of that, but hey....this kid don't need no frickin evidence he has gawd. The great equalizer, and by that, everyone is equal, whether you believe or not. Meh....what good is a god what don't cater to his own eh?

[Hydra009]

Where is the evidence that people die?

So I take it you've never seen a cemetery?

You keep on pretending that your guesses are evidence when in reality stay guesses.

People who live in glass houses...

It is more likely that your consciousness follow you wherever you go so if you are a fair person your dreams and your expectations will eventuate into a future life.

You have no idea whether or not this is this case.  It is something you want to believe is real so you've convinced yourself that it's real.

There are thousand of example in which small children are so clever even if nobody teach them anything.
You may wonder where they learned those skills.
Take Mozart and Beethoven.
At the age of 3 or 4 Mozart and 6 or 7 Beethoven they were already skilled enough to give their first concert.
Obviously they learned those skills in previous lives.

Baruch?

Nobody is equal to anybody else.

I take it no one explained to you that evolution operates at the level of populations.  No wonder your claims about evolution are so wonky.

Consciousness and energy are the two sides of the same sheet and because energy is behind destruction also consciousness is.

It's so strange that you think this is a coherent thought, let alone a cogent argument.

What really happen according to me is that those who are not able to keep up with the fast race will end up in a different race in which they can compete.
It is like a mosaic tiles.
A particular tile can only fit in a particular mosaic

Whatever.  Find somewhere else to peddle your BS.

[Baruch]

There....in a nutshell. Pretty much lays bare the crux of the boys whole thesis. The grandest of human arrogance. That humans don't die like "other" creatures. We are "special". No evidence of that, but hey....this kid don't need no frickin evidence he has gawd. The great equalizer, and by that, everyone is equal, whether you believe or not. Meh....what good is a god what don't cater to his own eh?

"Baruch?" inarticulate much, Hydra009?  I believe that Arik is referring to the Socratic/Platonic theory of knowledge:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonic_epistemology

i don't agree with Socrates/Plato.  And that philosophy relies on a rationalism of disembodied Platonic Forms that the hoi polloi can tap into:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method ... basically a form of psychological rationalism ... that is anti-empirical.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meno%27s_slave ... here is the "demonstration" of the method ... ignorant slave vs geometry.

Per Heraclitus, I have to agree with Arik "Nobody is equal to anybody else.", and per Cratylus, you aren't even equal to yourself (because you are constantly changing).

http://faculty.evansville.edu/tb2/trip/cratylus.htm