IMMATERIALITY OF GODS. The Four Reasons Are 1. God’ssilence, 2. God’sinaction, 3. the lack of evidence, and 4. the universe looks exactly like a godless universe would, and not at all like a Christian universe would, even down to its very structure. Of course this is true if you think gods are material beings. If instead you think gods are software distributed in the minds of all of their worshippers, producing synchronicities because of the software, then that’s quite different. You see, I talk to my gods all the time, but I don’t have to imagine them as supernatural because I understand that they exist as information and information hosted in a vast distributed computing network called ‘worshippers’ who pay debts to these gods (thanks) in exchange for wisdom and the consequences of wisdom obtained from their counsel. Gods exist like numbers exist. They do not exist in supernatural form. THey’re just information. And that is enough.
Theme: Science
-
Immateriality of Gods.
IMMATERIALITY OF GODS. The Four Reasons Are 1. God’ssilence, 2. God’sinaction, 3. the lack of evidence, and 4. the universe looks exactly like a godless universe would, and not at all like a Christian universe would, even down to its very structure. Of course this is true if you think gods are material beings. If instead you think gods are software distributed in the minds of all of their worshippers, producing synchronicities because of the software, then that’s quite different. You see, I talk to my gods all the time, but I don’t have to imagine them as supernatural because I understand that they exist as information and information hosted in a vast distributed computing network called ‘worshippers’ who pay debts to these gods (thanks) in exchange for wisdom and the consequences of wisdom obtained from their counsel. Gods exist like numbers exist. They do not exist in supernatural form. THey’re just information. And that is enough.
-
Rate of Mutation Tells Us Little Other than Time
Rate of Mutation Tells Us Little Other than Time. https://propertarianism.com/2019/10/03/rate-of-mutation-tells-us-little-other-than-time/
Source date (UTC): 2019-10-03 21:53:41 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179877204714512384
-
Rate of Mutation Tells Us Little Other than Time.
SORRY ALL BUT, NO. RATE OF MUTATION TELLS US LITTLE OTHER THAN TIME. (a) mutation rate != yardage (or any other linear measure) (b) some mutations (cortical scale) are profoundly differentiating – just one gene. (20% of neurons in the cortex are regulatory That number increases by region. The same is true for genes. It certainly appears that the vast majority are either dead (not expressed) or regulatory. We don’t know what percent are expressed. So all mutation rate tells us is time difference it does not tell us difference in genetic expression. (c) some are profoundly consequential (delay in maturity : neoteny – just hormonal development is largely what varies between human races) (d) Genes do not produce linear effects (machine parts) but are causally dense (program code) with anything from zero consequence (noise, or regulatory), some of tiny consequence (rates of expression), and some profound. (e) One Single Additional Protein (molecular machine) may cause billions of consequences. So; (f) Of our evolutionary history, regardless of the RATE of migration, it could be only .001% of those mutations that cause 99.999% of competitive evolutionary variations. (g) we make a big deal out of 3% difference from chimpanzees but we have no idea the scale of difference provided by each of those variations. intelligence appears to be affected by hundreds if not thousands (a concert problem). Neoteny appears not to be (a small number of hormonal channels). Yet together the effect of these two sets is profound with just small changes. (h) As far as I know almost all evolutionary change is driven by: – demand for success in the local environment (ie: black resistance to malaria). – failure in the local environment (loss of height in southeast islands, loss of fire making, tool making, by austronesians.) – utility (white consumption of milk adding 40% more calories to the diet) – social animal sortition (variations in demand for competitive traits) – age of the carriers (rate of mutation or degradation) – errors in replication (genes – which happen all the time – cancer etc ) – conflicts in integration (male and female genes) – random mutations. – combinations of all of the above. On statistics: There isn’t much evidence that we are capable of using statistics on any causally dense phenomenon with any greater precision than a single regression. Period. YOU CAN’T AVERAGE AN AVERAGE, and STATISTICS MUST BE OPERATIONALLY EXPLICABLE OR THEY’RE MEANINGLESS. (correlation is not causation, and operations produce correlations) You have to explain both to make a truth claim.
-
Rate of Mutation Tells Us Little Other than Time.
SORRY ALL BUT, NO. RATE OF MUTATION TELLS US LITTLE OTHER THAN TIME. (a) mutation rate != yardage (or any other linear measure) (b) some mutations (cortical scale) are profoundly differentiating – just one gene. (20% of neurons in the cortex are regulatory That number increases by region. The same is true for genes. It certainly appears that the vast majority are either dead (not expressed) or regulatory. We don’t know what percent are expressed. So all mutation rate tells us is time difference it does not tell us difference in genetic expression. (c) some are profoundly consequential (delay in maturity : neoteny – just hormonal development is largely what varies between human races) (d) Genes do not produce linear effects (machine parts) but are causally dense (program code) with anything from zero consequence (noise, or regulatory), some of tiny consequence (rates of expression), and some profound. (e) One Single Additional Protein (molecular machine) may cause billions of consequences. So; (f) Of our evolutionary history, regardless of the RATE of migration, it could be only .001% of those mutations that cause 99.999% of competitive evolutionary variations. (g) we make a big deal out of 3% difference from chimpanzees but we have no idea the scale of difference provided by each of those variations. intelligence appears to be affected by hundreds if not thousands (a concert problem). Neoteny appears not to be (a small number of hormonal channels). Yet together the effect of these two sets is profound with just small changes. (h) As far as I know almost all evolutionary change is driven by: – demand for success in the local environment (ie: black resistance to malaria). – failure in the local environment (loss of height in southeast islands, loss of fire making, tool making, by austronesians.) – utility (white consumption of milk adding 40% more calories to the diet) – social animal sortition (variations in demand for competitive traits) – age of the carriers (rate of mutation or degradation) – errors in replication (genes – which happen all the time – cancer etc ) – conflicts in integration (male and female genes) – random mutations. – combinations of all of the above. On statistics: There isn’t much evidence that we are capable of using statistics on any causally dense phenomenon with any greater precision than a single regression. Period. YOU CAN’T AVERAGE AN AVERAGE, and STATISTICS MUST BE OPERATIONALLY EXPLICABLE OR THEY’RE MEANINGLESS. (correlation is not causation, and operations produce correlations) You have to explain both to make a truth claim.
-
No. Don’t Conflate Arousal and Consciousness
No. Don’t Conflate Arousal and Consciousness https://propertarianism.com/2019/10/03/no-dont-conflate-arousal-and-consciousness/
Source date (UTC): 2019-10-03 21:35:25 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179872608835313664
-
No. Don’t Conflate Arousal and Consciousness
Gak. No. Confusing Arousal with Consciousness is like confusing the light switch with the light. Just ’cause we can turn off the switch doesn’t tell us how the light is created. We can interfere with any number of parts (Colostrum) and shut down experience. That doesn’t tell us anything. The question is, how does that mushy wetware synthesize past memory present experience, and future prediction, from millions of nerves (measurements) into our rather amazing conflated experiences of past, present and future? (cortical hierarchy, parahippocampal, perirhinal, entorhinal cortices and subiculum.) How do we shift between narrow focus, near perception, environmental perception, self perception, and deep introspection and imagination? (thalamus) Why is it we can react so quickly that we can hit a curve ball with a bat? (basal ganglia, cerebellum, and cortical prediction) How do we Assemble memories and experience them? (Hippocampus) What is that feeling of me? (mostly, hippocampus) Why can’t we pin it down. “Cause it’s a verb not a noun”. The continuous change in state in a hierarchy of ever smaller cycles of time….
-
No. Don’t Conflate Arousal and Consciousness
Gak. No. Confusing Arousal with Consciousness is like confusing the light switch with the light. Just ’cause we can turn off the switch doesn’t tell us how the light is created. We can interfere with any number of parts (Colostrum) and shut down experience. That doesn’t tell us anything. The question is, how does that mushy wetware synthesize past memory present experience, and future prediction, from millions of nerves (measurements) into our rather amazing conflated experiences of past, present and future? (cortical hierarchy, parahippocampal, perirhinal, entorhinal cortices and subiculum.) How do we shift between narrow focus, near perception, environmental perception, self perception, and deep introspection and imagination? (thalamus) Why is it we can react so quickly that we can hit a curve ball with a bat? (basal ganglia, cerebellum, and cortical prediction) How do we Assemble memories and experience them? (Hippocampus) What is that feeling of me? (mostly, hippocampus) Why can’t we pin it down. “Cause it’s a verb not a noun”. The continuous change in state in a hierarchy of ever smaller cycles of time….
-
Economic Advice and The Public
ECONOMIC ADVICE AND THE PUBLIC [E]conomics has been a cudgel for justifying a moral bias, not a science to which we must conform our moral intuitions. Libertarians are largely advocating free riding on the commons just as much as socialist advocate free riding upon the private sector. No economic proposition is decidable by either libertarian or socialist without first solving the question of the distribution of a mixed economy, since only mixed economies can survive competition in the market for polities. The answer of course is just rule of law by reciprocity and that we track investments by the polity in returns and prevent the public from privatizing public gains, just as much as we prevent the public from socializing private gains. In other words, it’s largely a problem of record keeping and accounting. The problem is everyone has an interests in maintaining the lie, and maintaining chaos in the public who resorts to petty moralizing out of ignorance.
-
Economic Advice and The Public
ECONOMIC ADVICE AND THE PUBLIC [E]conomics has been a cudgel for justifying a moral bias, not a science to which we must conform our moral intuitions. Libertarians are largely advocating free riding on the commons just as much as socialist advocate free riding upon the private sector. No economic proposition is decidable by either libertarian or socialist without first solving the question of the distribution of a mixed economy, since only mixed economies can survive competition in the market for polities. The answer of course is just rule of law by reciprocity and that we track investments by the polity in returns and prevent the public from privatizing public gains, just as much as we prevent the public from socializing private gains. In other words, it’s largely a problem of record keeping and accounting. The problem is everyone has an interests in maintaining the lie, and maintaining chaos in the public who resorts to petty moralizing out of ignorance.