Derek, the people that know the most of these stuff come up with those ideas. If you want to tell them they don't know enough about their stuff to do anything, you go out there and tell them.
I don't really get the point. Sure, there are a great number of neurons, and those make an insane amount of synaptic connections. You also forgot the complex nature of these connections. There are several ways in which these connections can be strenghtened in terms of the electronic signal jumping over them. But the is also the neurotransmitter that modifies this electrical signal that is jumping over the synapse in a particular way. But what are you saying? That we are too stupid to know this? Well, maybe. But we do know. Should we erase this knowledge? But then again, we do have an incredible complex neural net. So we are pretty smart.
It is one thing to have confidence that we'll continue to discover all kinds of wonderful things about mathematics for example, but to just ASSUME that the human brain evolved from muck billions of years ago, based on a theory that is probably not even 200 years old seems to me to be the height of insanity.
First off, we don't assume. We have reasons. We have a working theory of evolution.
But, you assume that, when you turn on your tv or computer screen, that it will work. But the mechanics which describes the workings of this device is only about 101 years old. Further more, you probably don't know any quantum mechanics. So to believe that, when you turn on your tv, it does work, is insanity? Right? But it does work. So how insane is it? Do you expect every person that uses technology to understand how it works?
I mean, maybe it IS true, but how can anyone just assume that based on so little?
That little has lead to concrete answers and applications. So it may be relatively little, but it is still very meaningful.
Doesn't anyone feel that there must be much, much more to the universe than meets the eye?
How much of the universe has met your eye?
You must understand that large parts of science, and very much so in astronomy, is very serious. It isn't just some people speculating.
WHAT in heaven's name is a subatomic particle?
WHAT is the base case of the universe, the smallest indivisible element. Will we ever be able to answer that question? We are made up of these tiniest indivisible elements, and all we can do is describe their (at least at a macroscopic level) consistent behavior.
What is your point, and what do you actually mean. A sub-atomic particle. That's easy. It is all the particles that help make up an atom; electrons, protons, neutron, but also photons, muons, neutrinos, etc. So everything less structured than an atom. Actually, neutrons and protons are made up by quarks so they are already composite particles.
All we can do is describe their behavior? We can't; quantum mechanics. But, what else should we be able to do. What do you except?
Will we ever know WHAT and WHY?
Which what and why?
All I'm encouraging anyone to do is to not take these questions for granted.
Which ones? Which questions.
I am sometimes just dumbfounded by the arrogance some people have in just assuming naturalism really has any answers. Without thinking about it--just ASSUMING. It makes me so mad.
We aren't assuming. Look in front of you. Your computer works. Science works.
When people start spouting off all the same dismissive and reductionist nonsense such as ::starts talking like someone with the IQ of 75 [...]
Dismissive and reductionist nonsense? What are your pointing towards? Darwinism? If so, then you are arrogant and ignorant. Deep and profound thought has been put into this. Have you read a book on darwinism? You have no idea what you are talking about. For example, humans share a common ancestor with apes. That's what science claims. What you are talking about is a straw man made by fundamentalist muslims or christians.
Of course, people with religious ideas who take things EQUALLY for granted are ALSO irritating, but they irritate me less because their philosophy is about Love and all kinds of wonderful ideals. Anyone else who claims to hold to those ideals, I think, are borrowing on religious capital and need to give their heritage more credit.
Taking things for granted. I still do not understand what you mean. Yes, our brains are made up by nothing more than electrical signals and physical processe. But this is actually very profound. You don't appriciate the complexity of all of it because you don't seem to be aware of it. Even I am not aware about everything humans know and you are right that we know very little about the concrete function of our brain.
Lets take a simple neuron. I already talked about the neuron in the brain being a relatively complex neuron. But let's take a very basic artificial neuron. If you make a neural net with these very simple neurons you can get profound results because of their numbers and about the sheer number of combined calculations. Try to get your mind around this, how can a neural net learn to do complex things like pattern recognition. Now if you take the human brain, which still has neurons which are in itself simple to see how they function; but to comprehend their results, the number of connections made and their strenghts, the patterns that are being created is a totally different issue. A neuron is a simple thing. We can dissect it under a microscope and find out the all their parts and their functionality. There is nothing magical about it. But all those things together; magic does happen there. And then you can talk about the effects on a higher, psychological level. Eventhough the neuron itself is a stupid simple processor functioning through electrical current and neurotransmitter chemicals.
Look how the moral fiber of the masses deteriorates to a level of depravity to which we have never before sunk in human history since the advent of naturalism. Something must be done about this and plain old Reason isn't going to convince anyone to change their ways.
Uuh. Have you read the history books? What you are saying here doesn't make any sense at all. First, 'plain old reason', hmm. Does this exist? This is new to me.
Naturalism affected the moral fiber of society. Let's look at history. Look at the dark ages. The greeks and roman may not have had the moral fiber you would prefer, but they did have knowledge. In the dark ages, the rise of christianity, life turned very grim. Knowledge was lost and the people were butchered even more than in the times of the romans and the greeks.
Moral fiber, there has never been a real moral fiber.
Yes, I think you should centainly thing a bit, and especially read, about all these things, because they are very profound.
Topic: People who think the human brain evolved are out of their minds. and other stuff