Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Ok, One More Try


DayLight

Recommended Posts

I tried to express something like this before, but it was totally not understood (from what I could tell).  So I decided to use a different angle to express the thoughts.  Maybe they would make more sense from this perspective.

 

It's like scrambling a word and people don't know what they are reading. If you can manage to put ideas in the right order (like putting together a word) some people may actually get the point.

There are two parts to life: physical and social/mental.

Laws of physics make the molecules come together into different combinations and form things, which creates physical life. And some other set of laws makes the people and objects come together into different combinations and form the social/mental side of life.

There are forces which hold physical molecules together. And there are also forces which hold the social "molecules" together.

So what is this force that brings people, objects and interests together and forms a social environment?

I see this force more like a system, or a set of laws, carried out...

These laws of social physics make people feel empty, which forces people to connect. When they connect, they feel happy. So that motivates them to connect.

When they connect, they are then forced by their internal programming to protect and promote the well- being of this object or person with whom they have connected. Plus in some situations people's internal programming dictates to them to stay around this person. And this internal programming is like the glue that holds these social molecules together.

Regular molecules form into groups and create physical structure.
Social molecules form into groups also and create social structures.

Imagine people are like molecules swimming around.... see them connecting and forming structures...

For example, one person feels empty and believes that he will be fulfilled by being a musician...one person thinks that he will be fulfilled by running a music school, one person thinks that he will be fulfilled by teaching music.... So these 3 social molecules are drawn together by their internal command to seek fulfillment. (Of course there are much more people required to build a music school: builders, office personnel, cleaning crew...and they will need to collect many objects to furnish their music school. So all of these people and things and interests are being drawn together and form a music school.

Clubs are formed because people seek fulfillment. So are churches and all kinds of other social systems.

Also families and relationships are formed because people seek fulfillment. And the more things the person connects with, the more fulfilled that person feels. If you have a family, you still long for a partner. If you have a partner, you still long for children. If you have a family, partner and children, you long for friends. And this circle grows.

Because of being drawn to objects there are people who buy paintings and because of being drawn to interests, there are people who paint things. Because of liking stories, people are drawn to watch tv. Because of being drawn to acting,

But when people are drawn to objects, interests and people and respond to that internal call and get together with those people or objects of interests, what is that process called? It's "connecting". They are connecting.

What is connecting to an object? It's being drawn to a certain painting (for example) and seeking to obtain it and loving it.

What is connecting to an interest? It's about being drawn to a certain activity and seeking to express yourself through this activity and loving doing it.

What is connecting to a person? It's being drawn to a person and loving them.

So connecting is about love. Love of people, love of interests, love of objects, love of ideas. Love is the force or the system which draws the social "molecules" together to form the social enviroment. And love is the system which keeps these "people/object/interest molecules" together. As they say: love binds us together. Love is the glue.

They also say that love builds. It really does. Literally. It builds structures.

But love is not an emotion in this case. Love is "laws of social physics". Love is the system, which when acted out, forms social structures.

Love is the system which dictates that a human will feel empty unless the human connects with something or someone (and as many of those as possible). Love system is a law which dictates that once the person connects with that something, the person will then be compelled to protect and promote that someone and will be drawn to be together with that someone or something.

What do we call life? When we see molecules combining together and forming objects and life as we know it, we would probably say: that's life, that's life in motion. And when we look at social molecules, how they are in motion and are combining together to form the social environment, we would say: that's life. So therefore, love could be equivalent to life.

Love is the system which makes little parts come together into one and form one huge organism, all the little parts are interconnected.

We have discovered a force which can break apart physical molecules, it breaks the bonds.

So what is the equivalent force in the social environment? It's hate. Hate destroys the structures and breaks the bonds. Love draws people and objects together and hate repels the objects and people.

Love is a confusing word because most people don't see it as a set of laws, but as an emotion.

Emotion is something that the Love system produces. The Love system has its design and it uses certain things to make things work. And so, it produces emotion. So like when a mother gives birth to a baby, she all of a sudden develops love for this "bundle of joy". But most of all, she develops a fierce over-protectiveness about this new life. And it's because the Love System has sent an internal command into her to protect this baby, and then the Love System has triggered some physical sensations. So, together, physical sensations and the command to protect the baby are interpreted as "the emotion of love".

This all is just my thinking. I guess I could be wrong, but I have no idea... It sounds good to me at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goodbye Jesus

You seem to believe that non-physical processes give rise to emotions, cognition and the like? At this point in time, all indications are that our emotions are also the result of physical processes. Therefore, physical "laws" give rise to our emotions or our emotions are emergent properties of certain configurations of matter. These configurations appear to be the result of physical processes.

 

I have to admit that our understanding is far from complete; however, we are well aware of the role of physical interactions with the brain the effects and manifestations of said interactions. Because there are so many well known and reasonably well described interactions that alter cognition, emotions and the like, I do not see the purpose in assuming non-physical (spiritual/supernatural/paranormal) processes play a role until we have fully explored the physical processes.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You seem to believe that non-physical processes give rise to emotions, cognition and the like? At this point in time, all indications are that our emotions are also the result of physical processes.

 

 

Someone says "I love you" and you feel all warm....  Or someone says"....." and you feel excitement spreading over your body and some things are being activated.... So to me it seems that mental things trigger physical sensations. And, as a package deal, these are called "emotions".

But if you felt the same physical sensation, but nothing mental, no idea with it, it wouldn't be called an emotion, it would be called whatever name for the physical sensation.

For example, when you're in love or attracted you could feel all hot... you will say: I am feeling excited.

 

But if you felt hot apart from that, you would say: I have a temperature, my body is hot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not follow. If my hawt wife gives me that look and says "I love you," billions of years of evolutionary biology surface because "bonding" and passing genetic material is critical for replicating biological systems. Therefore, my neurobiology has evolved to produce certain processes in order to be successful at passing said genetic material. Regarding this "hot" feeling you speak of. Vasoactive substances released by the brain and the endocrine system act upon blood vessels to cause dilation and increased permeability. This results in facial flushing. This acts upon sensory neurons (probably causes voltage gated ion channels or the like to open) and causes them to depolarise. This depolarisation travels up afferent pathways and is processed in the brain via complex neurological biochemistry. Ultimately, this flushing is interpreted as something we call "hot." If I spray you with pepper spray, you will have a "hot" sensation but your mucous membranes are not "hot" nor are they damaged but rather the pepper spray activates receptors that send impulses to the brain that are interpreted as being hot because they involve the activation of specific receptors and neuropathways.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh, so that's how blushing works.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You seem to believe that non-physical processes give rise to emotions, cognition and the like? At this point in time, all indications are that our emotions are also the result of physical processes.

 

 

Someone says "I love you" and you feel all warm....  Or someone says"....." and you feel excitement spreading over your body and some things are being activated.... So to me it seems that mental things trigger physical sensations. And, as a package deal, these are called "emotions".

But if you felt the same physical sensation, but nothing mental, no idea with it, it wouldn't be called an emotion, it would be called whatever name for the physical sensation.

For example, when you're in love or attracted you could feel all hot... you will say: I am feeling excited.

 

But if you felt hot apart from that, you would say: I have a temperature, my body is hot.

 

 

I think you would benefit from learning what is known about the hormones oxytocin, dopamine, and serotonin.  There are hundreds of others.  These are just the most well known ones, that are related to feelings associated with "love".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The chemicals released when you are in love will never even hint at the subjective feelings you feel as a result. A language other than biology is needed for that. No one in love says "I feel like my oxytocin receptors are being excited".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DayLight,

 

Please try and understand why you are paying lip-service to science but failing to use it properly.

Science has certain set procedures, methodologies and principles that must be adhered to at all times, by everyone practicing science.  These leave no room for personal and private interpretation. That's why a biologist in China can discuss biology with another biologist in Greece. They are both using the same terms and definitions, both using the same systems, the same this, the same that, etc., etc.

 

There is no room for private interpretation or personal beliefs in their dialog.

But what you doing is posting ONLY your personal beliefs and your private interpretations.  If you were using science properly you wouldn't do that.  Instead you'd cite scientific papers, use scientific terminology and definitions properly and discuss scientific theories and models. 

 

Do you see the difference?

So long as you are telling us about your personal insights, your private beliefs and your inner thoughts - that is NOT science.  Science is a collective and impersonal discipline, where it's practitioners put aside their own beliefs and act with professional impartiality. You aren't doing that.  Therefore, as much as you claim to be thinking scientifically - you aren't.

 

Science isn't what you want it to be - it's bigger than any one person.

If you want to think scientifically then you need to put aside your private beliefs and toe the professional, impartial scientific line. 

 

I hope this clarifies things.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I know, pills are - messages to the body.  I assume that hormones are the same.  Maybe they tell the body which combination of physical sensations to create, how to affect body organs and in which way. 

 

The way I see attraction is this:  When the body/mind system comes across something favorable (either a shape or other things) it (the unconscious part) sends a signal to the body: "I think that you need to approach this person because I think connecting to this person may result in a benefit to the body".  But the conscious doesn't understand the pure language of the unconscious.  So how could it send a message to it? It uses a combination of physical sensations.  (Like morse code or something).  You perceive this combination as "attraction".  If you pay attention to the moment when you experience attraction, you will find that you just feel all kinds of physical sensations.

 

I believe that we should think of things less as physical and more as programming and acting out instructions and laws.

 

Like gravity for example, I believe, is not a force, it's a description of the relationship between objects.  So it's not about a physical force, but how things relate to each other, the state of things, the relationship between things. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DayLight,

 

 

Science has certain set procedures, methodologies and principles that must be adhered to at all times, by everyone practicing science. 

BAA.

 

I get your point.  Except to add - what is the study of psychology and the big bang and other things that you can't really prove, but you can observe the pattern and reach conclusions? 

 

Each person will reach their own conclusions, but it's the collective's way of learning a subject, the collective's way of brainstorming about an idea.   So it's not about just beliefs, it's about learning about life, studying about life.  If it's not science, there should be another word for it, something to do with studying and reaching conclusions.

 

If people didn't come up with another word, then it's not someone's fault for borrowing the only word in existence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Evidence-based science doesn't work by proving things, DayLight.

 

Proofs only exist in Mathematics.

 

Evidence-based science argues to the best explanation. 

If your explanation of something doesn't use the accepted methods of making that argument - then it isn't science.  Sorry, but it's a simple as that!

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In math, they have to assume that something is true first (because they can't prove it) and then they use the assumption to see if it's working out in real life.  I am making an assumption (through observation) and then will need to see if it seems to be true in reality by more observation.

 

I think that math should be a part of science.  Terms can be modified as people understand more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the OP is actually quite a sweet way of codifying, somewhat loosely, and somewhat allegorically, an interesting way of looking at psychosocial patterns.

 

I didn't read anything in it claiming to be science, so I think it's over-harsh to reject it on those rather concrete grounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In math, they have to assume that something is true first (because they can't prove it) and then they use the assumption to see if it's working out in real life.  I am making an assumption (through observation) and then will need to see if it seems to be true in reality by more observation.

 

I think that math should be a part of science.  Terms can be modified as people understand more.

 

What da what?

 

What is this thing that math must assume because it cannot prove?  What science does not incorporate math?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tried to express something like this before, but it was totally not understood (from what I could tell).  So I decided to use a different angle to express the thoughts.  Maybe they would make more sense from this perspective.

 

It's like scrambling a word and people don't know what they are reading. If you can manage to put ideas in the right order (like putting together a word) some people may actually get the point.

 

There are two parts to life: physical and social/mental.

 

Laws of physics make the molecules come together into different combinations and form things, which creates physical life. And some other set of laws makes the people and objects come together into different combinations and form the social/mental side of life.

 

There are forces which hold physical molecules together. And there are also forces which hold the social "molecules" together.

 

So what is this force that brings people, objects and interests together and forms a social environment?

 

I see this force more like a system, or a set of laws, carried out...

 

These laws of social physics make people feel empty, which forces people to connect. When they connect, they feel happy. So that motivates them to connect.

 

When they connect, they are then forced by their internal programming to protect and promote the well- being of this object or person with whom they have connected. Plus in some situations people's internal programming dictates to them to stay around this person. And this internal programming is like the glue that holds these social molecules together.

 

Regular molecules form into groups and create physical structure.

Social molecules form into groups also and create social structures.

 

Imagine people are like molecules swimming around.... see them connecting and forming structures...

 

For example, one person feels empty and believes that he will be fulfilled by being a musician...one person thinks that he will be fulfilled by running a music school, one person thinks that he will be fulfilled by teaching music.... So these 3 social molecules are drawn together by their internal command to seek fulfillment. (Of course there are much more people required to build a music school: builders, office personnel, cleaning crew...and they will need to collect many objects to furnish their music school. So all of these people and things and interests are being drawn together and form a music school.

 

Clubs are formed because people seek fulfillment. So are churches and all kinds of other social systems.

 

Also families and relationships are formed because people seek fulfillment. And the more things the person connects with, the more fulfilled that person feels. If you have a family, you still long for a partner. If you have a partner, you still long for children. If you have a family, partner and children, you long for friends. And this circle grows.

 

Because of being drawn to objects there are people who buy paintings and because of being drawn to interests, there are people who paint things. Because of liking stories, people are drawn to watch tv. Because of being drawn to acting,

 

But when people are drawn to objects, interests and people and respond to that internal call and get together with those people or objects of interests, what is that process called? It's "connecting". They are connecting.

 

What is connecting to an object? It's being drawn to a certain painting (for example) and seeking to obtain it and loving it.

 

What is connecting to an interest? It's about being drawn to a certain activity and seeking to express yourself through this activity and loving doing it.

 

What is connecting to a person? It's being drawn to a person and loving them.

 

So connecting is about love. Love of people, love of interests, love of objects, love of ideas. Love is the force or the system which draws the social "molecules" together to form the social enviroment. And love is the system which keeps these "people/object/interest molecules" together. As they say: love binds us together. Love is the glue.

 

They also say that love builds. It really does. Literally. It builds structures.

 

But love is not an emotion in this case. Love is "laws of social physics". Love is the system, which when acted out, forms social structures.

 

Love is the system which dictates that a human will feel empty unless the human connects with something or someone (and as many of those as possible). Love system is a law which dictates that once the person connects with that something, the person will then be compelled to protect and promote that someone and will be drawn to be together with that someone or something.

 

What do we call life? When we see molecules combining together and forming objects and life as we know it, we would probably say: that's life, that's life in motion. And when we look at social molecules, how they are in motion and are combining together to form the social environment, we would say: that's life. So therefore, love could be equivalent to life.

 

Love is the system which makes little parts come together into one and form one huge organism, all the little parts are interconnected.

 

We have discovered a force which can break apart physical molecules, it breaks the bonds.

 

So what is the equivalent force in the social environment? It's hate. Hate destroys the structures and breaks the bonds. Love draws people and objects together and hate repels the objects and people.

 

Love is a confusing word because most people don't see it as a set of laws, but as an emotion.

 

Emotion is something that the Love system produces. The Love system has its design and it uses certain things to make things work. And so, it produces emotion. So like when a mother gives birth to a baby, she all of a sudden develops love for this "bundle of joy". But most of all, she develops a fierce over-protectiveness about this new life. And it's because the Love System has sent an internal command into her to protect this baby, and then the Love System has triggered some physical sensations. So, together, physical sensations and the command to protect the baby are interpreted as "the emotion of love".

 

This all is just my thinking. I guess I could be wrong, but I have no idea... It sounds good to me at the moment.

 

If it sounds good to you at the moment then enjoy the moment!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have nothing to say. Every time this goes up, you keep not understanding that you're trying to incorporate personal beliefs into science.

 

Science is an impartial process using evidence to form conclusions.

 

You can't say "I feel it works this way" in science, because then you've messed up and you're not going to space today.

 

Look at it impartially, don't throw in the spiritual, and run it from there.

 

There's nothing more than natural to our world. It's just on us to figure out how to piece it all together from the evidence we have.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

you appear to be confused regarding the concept of a mathematical "proof." This is understandable. However, a mathematical proof may or may not work out in "real" life. In fact, much of math cannot be used to "perfectly" describe the universe. You see science is not about "proof" but rather it's about putting forth a reliable and testable framework that makes predictions about the universe. Math typically underpins the science however. I would advise you to really look at the concept of a mathematical proof. It is exceptionally complex and the assumptions that you point out, also known as axioms are derived differently than you probably believe. Also remember, math that cannot provide "real" answers is frequently used to make sense of the real world. Again, math is not necessarily about making "real" world predictions but science can use math as part of theoretical frameworks to make predictions. A subtle but important difference.

 

Like BAA mentioned, science explains and often the explanation is expressed in the "language" of math.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For your hypothesis to work it would have to be measurable. Is love measurable? Does it have substance.. or an effect? (like gravity)

 

 

Biologically speaking it's explainable - but I think you are going into the realm of metaphysics here.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the OP is actually quite a sweet way of codifying, somewhat loosely, and somewhat allegorically, an interesting way of looking at psychosocial patterns.

 

I didn't read anything in it claiming to be science, so I think it's over-harsh to reject it on those rather concrete grounds.

 

I don't believe she mentioned that her view was science and I did actually read the whole OP.... but my coffee is still waking up my receptors and depolarizing shit so who knows? 

 

I dont think there IS a requirement that someone's posting in this sub-forum has to be scientific. It could be religious  ... or scientific. :-) Or both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For your hypothesis to work it would have to be measurable. Is love measurable? Does it have substance.. or an effect? (like gravity)

 

 

Biologically speaking it's explainable - but I think you are going into the realm of metaphysics here.

 

When you say "to work" you mean "for it be scientifically explainable", right? I bet there are some things in the universe that we haven't even conceived of yet, but still function despite our lack of conception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Spock would...

 

Or T'Pol.

 

and Sheldon Cooper

 

 

Nah, Sheldon's got nothing on T'Pol.

 

Or Spock, but... T'Pol's prettier.

 

And actually has a romance arc in Enterprise, so she counts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The chemicals released when you are in love will never even hint at the subjective feelings you feel as a result. A language other than biology is needed for that. No one in love says "I feel like my oxytocin receptors are being excited".

 

Sure, I may not say that, but I know that at a physical level that's exactly what is happening.  I mentioned the hormones because I was referring to what science has learned about the physical processes from where the subjective feelings emerge, to make the point to Daylight that this is a science vs religion subforum.  A point which, despite the best attempts of several of us, appears to be lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I know, pills are - messages to the body.  I assume that hormones are the same.  Maybe they tell the body which combination of physical sensations to create, how to affect body organs and in which way. 

 

The way I see attraction is this:  When the body/mind system comes across something favorable (either a shape or other things) it (the unconscious part) sends a signal to the body: "I think that you need to approach this person because I think connecting to this person may result in a benefit to the body".  But the conscious doesn't understand the pure language of the unconscious.  So how could it send a message to it? It uses a combination of physical sensations.  (Like morse code or something).  You perceive this combination as "attraction".  If you pay attention to the moment when you experience attraction, you will find that you just feel all kinds of physical sensations.

 

I believe that we should think of things less as physical and more as programming and acting out instructions and laws.

 

Like gravity for example, I believe, is not a force, it's a description of the relationship between objects.  So it's not about a physical force, but how things relate to each other, the state of things, the relationship between things. 

 

I could follow your post up until the bolded sentence, which is a claim about consciousness that appears to be unsupported by any evidence.  Put simply, how do you know this about consciousness?  There's that word again, "know".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.