romansh

Really? http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44067797

No not just this. Books on science in general, personal introspection and actually thinking about the subject lead me to this conclusion. Again a simple assertion with little science.

And yet clocks do not tick at the same rate at the top of your head and at your feet. Interesting fun fact. Also, gravitational time dilation was measured from a difference in elevation between two clocks of only 33 cm

Be careful with the word "should", Joseph. Assuming the universe is not set in concrete and cause and effect hold sway: then every action will have a consequence, and of course there will likely be unintended consequences. So any model we choose will be wrong, but hopefully some will be useful. So if we act solely in our immediate self interest (as the US as appeared to have done by electing Trump) this will have consequences. If we take a longer term look to our self interest, eg having steady partners (military and trade) on our ever increasingly global borders, then I don't see isolationism being a benefit to any nation. Specifically a charter? I don't know. Left to the individual? To be effective there is likely an effective size for an organization to accomplish this supposed altruism. That would likely depend on luck as much as anything. I suspect you are asking "should" all individuals be required to contribute to the nation's security? I'll let you answer that.

You continue to propagate your fallacy. What lots of people think and how they bought into a position is not evidence for that position.

Please read the whole link I cannot imagine how P could be true; therefore P must be false. I cannot imagine how P could be false; therefore P must be true. You are also conflating fallacies. What people believed over history is irrelevant. People [some] still believe the Earth is flat, so what? Please read what I wrote not what you wrote. The few tens of milliseconds is for high speed activities like catching a ball. For the rest "now" consists of an amalgam of the last two to three seconds. Fun fact.

Argumentum ad populum and Argument from incredulity OK so we are never in the "now". This to me suggests "now" is an illusion. Eckhart Tolle's The Power of the Very, Very Recent Past?

I am always amazed by how much we can deduce about God.

If your community does not want "politically motivated" then I would suggest avoid politicians. Of course it, the news, is politically motivated ... that's what politics is about ... motivating people politically. Rupert Murdoch! But to your point on open borders. If a nation is xenophobic and does not want a whole bunch of foreigners coming, then a logical process might be helping out the foreigners in their home countries to make their lives more tolerable in their homelands. I remember having my Ford Escort being assembled in Mexico and people complaining why was it not assembled in Canada or the USA. By all means we can send aid, but for god's sake lets not send them a job? Of course the US and no doubt other countries are quite willing to bring in rich and educated from impoverished countries. I have mixed feelings when countries like Canada bring doctors from third world countries and then send in aid to these countries. Of course there has been a big sucking sound here in Canada as the US has taken up health professions from here. This of course is diminished as Trump's USA has become less desirable.

You are on a sticky wicket here Thormas. Regardless of whether time is real or not, it could be an illusion ... not as it seems. In relativistic terms it could flow in either direction. It is our apparent increasing entropy that gives time an apparent flow, though at a quantum level its direction seems to be an average. On a more pragmatic basis ... our feeling of now is at least a few tens of milliseconds in the past ... and this is in the common or garden sense you are using the word.

Yes ... the US should have open borders ... to let poor Americans out of the madness they have recently elected.

I can't help thinking animals don't have complicated concepts like 'more' - as opposed to more food or more stroking, more sleep in the case of my cat. For me I go with the complicated concept of 'enough' at least when it comes to the experience of existence.

Pain and suffering self created? I thought evolution imbued with this capability? Society, experiences, genetics etc shape us and our suffering. Whether I have the tools or not to avoid this suffering (if indeed this is our goal?) is a matter of luck.

Life for me is an illusion. When I die I fully expect it to be like before I was born. And here some clarification of it is required. If by it we the universe is continuing to unfold, then yes it will be the same. If by it we mean our consciousness, I don't hold any great expectations. Imagine we die in some dreamless sleep, why should I expect to wake up? We live in our actions and in the consequence expected and unexpected consequence. Somebody had a nice Alan Watt's animation about consequences. Why would it be any different for animals? Here we are chasing some duality of mind and matter.

As a stepping stone perhaps. But there are many flavours of religion. But think of people that get stuck in a pattern of thought eg those that withhold life saving interventions to their children. We don't choose our stepping stones ... we find ourselves moving towards them. Again it really does depend on what we mean by religion. If it is a recognition that we are connected to the "universe" then most religions would not qualify as religions in this sense.

Depends on where you put the emphasis in "General". I remember in my university days hitching to London and being picked up by a born again Christian. He claimed he had been a drug addict (I believed him) and that one day coming out of trip on train Jesus had come to him and changed his life forever. From my perspective he had swapped one dependency to a less harmful one. Which of course is fine. I am all for harm reduction. This why I am all for Sophisticated Theology®. Basically it is or can be a gateway out of the more harmful forms of religion. The etymology of the word religion comes from the Latin "to reconnect" (at least this is the most commonly accepted one - Oxford Dictionary, and therefore right). The question is, reconnect to what? For some it is God, one another, society, faith, church - whatever. For me it is the universe. So if we take a no free will look at positive and negative the question seems a little human.

Yes; but I suspect there is a risk. In The God Delusion Dawkins describes an atheist that regularly went to his CoE church. The explanation went along the lines to keep solidarity with tribe.

Just to be clear Joseph I did not describe anyone as ignorant nor did I say anyone's belief was ignorant.

I don't think so. I have no evidence of inspiration that is somehow not a product of my brain which chemistry and physics. Please feel free to share your evidence.

Here's my take Paul. There is only one reality "out" there. It's like the metaphor of blindfolded monks feeling an elephant. But it is even more complex than that. The blindfolded monks and elephant are one. So it is a little bit like a mathematical set that contains itself. Could be problematic. It's not so much that reality has shades of grey, it is more that any model (religion, dogma, law whatever) we use to describe that reality does not quite fit; so we can end up taking a nuanced approach to the model we are imposing on the universe or we can say are model is carved in stone and take a black and white stance. And even this model I am proposing might have holes in it. Hence the debate and dialogue forum ... we can test our ideas models from different viewpoints etc.

Three days and I'll be back.

Well it might be humour thormas, but it is humorously avoiding the point Been snowing here.

I went back through all your posts in this thread to before Christmas Burl. You did not pose a single question; based the use of a question mark.

No not at all. What is evident from your reply (and that of others) is that those of us who believe in free will are totally oblivious of all the subliminal outside of us ... eg pheromones. We are also seem to be denying eons of evolutionary development. eg when we start courting do we respond to the widened pupils of our potential loved ones. I know when I first started courting my wife, my hormonal system was on a different regulatory pathway compared to when I was not courting. well my apologies it should have read: God like - We can make choices - independent of our biases, education, experiences, evolution, environment and the universe in general?

Please provide a link - because I missed where your provided the evidence? Unless you mean this? With exception supposed revelation, are all the attributes listed not based in chemistry and physics?