|
Post by ouroboros on Mar 5, 2018 11:39:48 GMT -5
Yeah, just hearing about some of these experiments breaks my heart. Sometimes the price of knowledge is too high.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 5, 2018 11:42:14 GMT -5
Yeah, just hearing about some of these experiments breaks my heart. Sometimes the price of knowledge is too high. Yes.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 5, 2018 11:43:53 GMT -5
The Harlow monkey experiments mentioned in the link above, saw these in a psychology class over 45 years ago. The point, it shows the baby monkeys suffer, without comfort and affection, even that from a doll. I remember seeing a documentary about that when I was a child. It was quite horrific to me then, and really, not all that different now.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Mar 5, 2018 12:05:10 GMT -5
The Harlow monkey experiments mentioned in the link above, saw these in a psychology class over 45 years ago. The point, it shows the baby monkeys suffer, without comfort and affection, even that from a doll. I can't watch it because I know I will suffer if I do. I'm okay with suffering if I think it will serve value, but in this case, I don't think it will. The experiment is a GREAT example of your point though. Yes, thanks. Reef's link is much worse, it discusses a similar experiment with human babies.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Mar 5, 2018 12:13:08 GMT -5
But what does that experiment indicate regarding your (non-)suffering theory about babies? The article didn't mention anything about screaming in agony and finally hanging themselves in their cribs. It said they died. The alleged study was about the significance of 'love and nurturing' which I see as the need to engage with the world that the child just entered. Everybody needs a reason to live. We commonly see old folks peacefully dying when that reason is no longer there. This reminds me of the guy who fell out of a plane without a parachute. All the way down he kept saying to himself, so far, so good.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 5, 2018 12:24:18 GMT -5
But what does that experiment indicate regarding your (non-)suffering theory about babies? The article didn't mention anything about screaming in agony and finally hanging themselves in their cribs. It said they died. The alleged study was about the significance of 'love and nurturing' which I see as the need to engage with the world that the child just entered. Everybody needs a reason to live. We commonly see old folks peacefully dying when that reason is no longer there. I stayed at a friend's house in America once, I was quite young, but he and his wife had just had a baby. He went off to work early, around 5. The baby started crying at around 6.30. I expected Mom to get up but I think she was struggling to handle motherhood, and so left the baby. By 7 the baby was wailing. By 7.30 the baby was screaming. I was suffering, and was in dilemma over choice of going to Mom's bedroom to get her up, or go and get the baby myself and try and calm her...but I didn't feel I had much experience of babies, and I didn't want to insult the family. The baby was suffering. In the end I prayed and called on angels. Amazingly enough the baby calmed in about 5 minutes and THEN Mom got up. You just can't really compare old folks being at peace with impending death, and a baby not being given love and affection and dying as a result.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 5, 2018 12:27:28 GMT -5
I can't watch it because I know I will suffer if I do. I'm okay with suffering if I think it will serve value, but in this case, I don't think it will. The experiment is a GREAT example of your point though. Yes, thanks. Reef's link is much worse, it discusses a similar experiment with human babies. yeah I know of the experiment so didn't even consider clicking the link.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Mar 5, 2018 12:31:44 GMT -5
But what does that experiment indicate regarding your (non-)suffering theory about babies? The article didn't mention anything about screaming in agony and finally hanging themselves in their cribs. It said they died. The alleged study was about the significance of 'love and nurturing' which I see as the need to engage with the world that the child just entered. Everybody needs a reason to live. We commonly see old folks peacefully dying when that reason is no longer there. Well, having no reason to live isn't that the definition of hopelessness? And the comparison with old folks is a bit of an apples and oranges comparison. The article also didn't mention anything about dying peacefully.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 5, 2018 19:23:52 GMT -5
Me neither. That blew my self aware mind. We currently have an ant problem here and we've been murdering self aware ants by the hundreds. It also brings us one step closer to seeing the truth about Seth's self-aware electrons. It got me to pondering the deeper implications of the hive mind. Is a collective mind somehow self aware? You mean like facebook and ST are self-aware? Some critters work collectively to support the group, like bees and ants. I don't believe there's some kind of biological communication going on, so it must be happening on another level. It makes me wonder if they are somehow self aware as a collective, and this somehow translates into individual self awareness. I've talked about the starling clouds before. I don't know how it's done, but it's not choreographed by bird brains. Wonderbeauty:
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 5, 2018 19:28:59 GMT -5
Ego forms when the child fully grasps the idea and implications of 'me' vs 'you'. I don't really have a problem defining ego like that, just adding it to the list of criterion necessary for an experience of suffering, along with the ability of self-recognition in a mirror (which incidentally seems to vary from animal to animal within the same species - presumably meaning I can torture one to death and it suffers, and another, not). I'd be careful of putting too much faith in the mirror test. It just seems to be the best we got.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 5, 2018 19:40:39 GMT -5
I don't get that you don't get that I don't get that, though this is the first I've heard of it. Hehe. So, there has to be suffering before there can be suffering? Do I really need to point out the problem with that? Watch the video, it will explain everything. The baby monkey with no affection, obviously suffers. Lack of affection, even that of a rag doll, forms a distorted monkey "ego", which suffers. The video evidence does not prove suffering. I thought by now we would have established my view on that. Also, what does it have to do with having to suffer before you suffer?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 5, 2018 19:47:05 GMT -5
Obviously, animals learn from experience to be wary of certain situations. If they didn't, they wouldn't survive long. You call it being traumatized and conclude suffering, but you don't know that. Part of my interest here is to get peeps to stop knowing things they don't really know.
As for the infant, she can't remember being raped because there was no 'me' structure around which to form a traumatic event. Same reason you can't remember anything as an infant either. I don't know why her life is hell, but I'm not going to assume it's because of an event she doesn't remember. Well the thing is that there are some things that are known that you have to go out of your way intellectually NOT to know them. I'm not saying that that makes these things unquestionable, but equally, the nature of life is such that we can question the as.s out of some things, and we are still going to know them. In this case, if you hear a baby screaming, you can't NOT know that it is suffering. (There are certain other things that you also can't not know....ahem....) When you say you can't not know something, you have made it unquestionable. The only thing you can't not know is that you exist, which is something you question on a regular basis.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 5, 2018 19:54:36 GMT -5
I'm talking about this: "when it has something to 'say', it is is far more potent than the thinking or cognitive mind" That's separating it from the cognitive mind and personalizing it. As you say here, there's an underlying thought that triggers it. It doesn't have something to say beyond that thought that precedes it, and it's not more potent than the thought that follows it. My point is that you can't think your way out of a feeling when it happens. In this sense, the feeling has something to say, and doesn't give a monkeys what the thinking mind has to say. With the right thought, the feeling will change, because the thoughts are what trigger the feeling and hold it in place. (I'm not saying that thought will occur)
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 5, 2018 19:59:25 GMT -5
Fine, but remaining immobile at the end of the driveway for an extended period of time waiting for one option to outweigh the other is not a rational option, so by some means a decision is made. Everyone knows this from their own experience so I don't understand how anyone sees a paradox. ah, as i just said, my approach isn't very rational compared to most folks. There are times when I have sat and waited. There have been times when I have felt the movement to go for a walk, and will walk one way down the street, and then back the way I came, and then back the way I came etc....to most folks this is an 'irrational' way to go for a walk, but sometimes that's just the way the movement wants to play itself out. What the world considers to be 'sane', I don't have much care for. There are times though when sitting and waiting isn't appropriate I agree. I didn't use the word paradox, maybe someone else did. It was used in the article. I was challenging the assumptions in the article, not you. (At least until you seemed to imply the same thing.)
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 5, 2018 20:05:44 GMT -5
So what you call values is when you value something? Doing something?... Okay, I smell rabbit, so lets let that one go. Yeah, values are just 'what you value' lol...nothing complicated about it. You value what you call 'truth' and this is reflected in your choices. This is the definition I assumed you were using, which is not the same as 'stuff you value' and is more complicated lol: "1. Important and lasting beliefs or ideals shared by the members of a culture about what is good or bad and desirable or undesirable. Values have major influence on a person's behavior and attitude and serve as broad guidelines in all situations. Some common business values are fairness, innovation and community involvement. Read more: www.businessdictionary.com/definition/values.html
|
|