Sociopath Community

Spatial Mind said: 

Turncoat said: 

Yeah, a purpose that averaged out over generations of evolution. 

This is why you see animals with vestigial parts or pieces of something that don't fully do their job, like humans have with the tailbone. The design need not be intelligent if it's done slowly overtime, as those who could not survive with their traits would die out Darwin-style. 

You know the Theory of evolution was made by a theist?

Are you suggesting I'm supposed to be surprised when religious people found scientific advancements? 

I also think it's absurd that an unconscious force could connect the dots and code DNA to provide functional parts.

I don't see how it couldn't when the conditions here literally kill off that which could not survive in it. 

Turncoat said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

Turncoat said: 

Yeah, a purpose that averaged out over generations of evolution. 

This is why you see animals with vestigial parts or pieces of something that don't fully do their job, like humans have with the tailbone. The design need not be intelligent if it's done slowly overtime, as those who could not survive with their traits would die out Darwin-style. 

You know the Theory of evolution was made by a theist?

Are you suggesting I'm supposed to be surprised when religious people found scientific advancements? 

A theory isn't something to swear by. No missing links have been found.

I brought it up cause that theory is the holy grail for atheists. 

I also think it's absurd that an unconscious force could connect the dots and code DNA to provide functional parts.

I don't see how it couldn't when the conditions here literally kill off that which could not survive in it. 

 No matter how much time you give it. The inanimate will never think, nor make mistakes or do anything.

What couldn't survive never came to be to begin with. Sure there are extinct creatures but even they had what they needed to survive.

Good said: 

You can't prove it is not either

I can however display numbers that are truly random numbers:

https://qrng.anu.edu.au/

You cant calculate those even if you know all the discovered variables involved in the generation of these numbers. At least not for now.

Quantum fluctuations.... How random number generators have evolved. Prior to this... the best I've seen was one based on CPU temperature. Unfortunately, I can not access that website. It doesn't prove that the Universe is random. But then you're not trying to do that.. are you?

Bell's theorem ought to at the very least provide strong evidence that there are no underlying hidden variables involved in quantum processes.

That being said, I do think that quantum physics may one day indicate that your mindset actually has a physical effect on reality, but it's just a cool idea I have, for now, not saying that it is so.

SpatialMind will love this.

Why would quantum physics one day indicate your mindset has a physical effect on reality..? You should reject this notion based on Occam's razor in lieu of a way to test your hypothesis. There's no reason to think it's your mind that alters the double slit experiment or anything like that.. Mind is not needed to explain anything there. It's like saying it was ghosts or fairies... there's about as much evidence for those.

Spatial Mind said: 

Turncoat said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

Turncoat said: 

Yeah, a purpose that averaged out over generations of evolution. 

This is why you see animals with vestigial parts or pieces of something that don't fully do their job, like humans have with the tailbone. The design need not be intelligent if it's done slowly overtime, as those who could not survive with their traits would die out Darwin-style. 

You know the Theory of evolution was made by a theist?

Are you suggesting I'm supposed to be surprised when religious people found scientific advancements? 

A theory isn't something to swear by. No missing links have been found.

I brought it up cause that theory is the holy grail for atheists. 

So?

If anything that proves even further that Science is not a matter of religious principles, but rather the denatured data of reality that's left after tons of rigorous testing. It doesn't matter if you believe in religion or not when it comes to the sciences as long as said religion isn't actively attempting to stand in the way of it as a byproduct of culture. 

I also think it's absurd that an unconscious force could connect the dots and code DNA to provide functional parts.

I don't see how it couldn't when the conditions here literally kill off that which could not survive in it. 

No matter how much time you give it. The inanimate will never think, nor make mistakes or do anything.

That depends on how you define inanimate, even within solids there's smaller pieces at work like bacteria. 

Considering that chemical reactions can happen independent of sentience, the inanimate can change in form through repeatedly different conditions until the potential for life could begin. 

There need not be a creator behind this at all, there's all sorts of theories as to why were here. Time could be a loop with no beginning or no end for example, with us only assuming there must be an origin to it over our understanding of the passage of time within the human construct of our education system and theories. Without a definite beginning or end that loops on itself the material could simply be cycling between repetitious stages like that of a chemistry reaction with life as a fluke side effect of this process. 

Consciousness only has the value we give it, the cosmos does not care. We are such a small fragment of it that our importance and purpose can't be seen as anything grand beyond our own room to appreciate it. 

What couldn't survive never came to be to begin with. Sure there are extinct creatures but even they had what they needed to survive.

They could survive however long they could within those conditions until they couldn't, and from multiple generations of births we can see mutations that can potentially be beneficial when it comes to surviving the shifting conditions. 

You should look into Darwin's trials with Hummingbirds. 

Cavalier said: 

Those that search for a purpose in life are depressed fucks imo. You dont need to search for a purpose when life is enjoyable.

But you do when life is not enjoyable...? What a binary mind you have.

That being said, my purpose in life should be to serve God, but I'm taking it in a very relaxed way and haven't been doing much. Maybe he will change me.

Cavalier. You say you believe in God. How do you see the ideal *you*?

If what you say is true... I probably mis... assessed? Did not assess properly? I did not assess you very well, given your troll-ish and at least apparently malicious nature. Why do you attack so many people here...? Just because it's fun? What about your God? I'm inclined to think you're either a hypocrite or a liar.

Myself... I have standards. I believe in discipline. You, on the other hand, are out of control.

Turncoat said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

Turncoat said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

Turncoat said: 

Yeah, a purpose that averaged out over generations of evolution. 

This is why you see animals with vestigial parts or pieces of something that don't fully do their job, like humans have with the tailbone. The design need not be intelligent if it's done slowly overtime, as those who could not survive with their traits would die out Darwin-style. 

You know the Theory of evolution was made by a theist?

Are you suggesting I'm supposed to be surprised when religious people found scientific advancements? 

A theory isn't something to swear by. No missing links have been found.

I brought it up cause that theory is the holy grail for atheists. 

So?

If anything that proves even further that Science is not a matter or religious principles, but rather the denatured data of reality that's left after tons of rigorous testing. It doesn't matter if you believe in religion or not when it comes to the sciences as long as said religion isn't actively attempting to stand in the way of it as a byproduct of culture. 

It's still a theory, and theories are unproven. For the atheist, Charles Darwin provided a faith.

I also think it's absurd that an unconscious force could connect the dots and code DNA to provide functional parts.

I don't see how it couldn't when the conditions here literally kill off that which could not survive in it. 

No matter how much time you give it. The inanimate will never think, nor make mistakes or do anything.

That depends on how you define inanimate, even within solids there's smaller pieces at work like bacteria. 

Considering that chemical reactions can happen independent of sentience, the inanimate can change in form through repeatedly different conditions until the potential for life could begin. 

I don't believe there has been any biological transformations from a dead creature. That which evolved is alive and sentient. 

The bacteria is also alive. How could it have been alive to begin with escapes science. The bacteria and other squiggly things are also by design and are programmed. They too have a purpose.

Time could be a loop with no beginning or no end for example, with us only assuming there must be an origin to it over our understanding of the passage of time within the human construct of our education system and theories. Without a definite beginning or end that loops on itself the material could simply be cycling between repetitious stages like that of a chemistry reaction with life as a fluke side effect of this process. 

Scientifically speaking, if the big bang theory is true, then time does have a beginning as space and time are unified and cannot exist without the other.

What we are is more complex than a tornado randomly mixing junk to produce a working Ev complete with voice commands and other features.

Our components have a purpose, it's no fluke. There's a reason your hands are like that, it's meant to be that way.

Consciousness only has the value we give it, the cosmos does not care. We are such a small fragment of it that our importance and purpose can't be seen as anything grand beyond our own room to appreciate it. 

The scale of the universe is actually convenient to us. We are far from unimportant or insignificant. We are very precious, and maybe very rare. We're more interesting than the Star we orbit. Earth is the envy of all planets in the solar system.

What couldn't survive never came to be to begin with. Sure there are extinct creatures but even they had what they needed to survive.

They could survive however long they could within those conditions until they couldn't, and from multiple generations of births we can see mutations that can potentially be beneficial when it comes to surviving the shifting conditions. 

The hammer strikes yet another nail on the head over millions of years eh ? We're on a roll here.

You should look into Darwin's trials with Hummingbirds. 

 Okay.

NotCS said: 

Tryptamine said: 

Purpose seems like a distraction from being a blob of chemicals. Or a bedrock of security for oneself, so at the end of the day one can say they've made progress, or at least there's some salient orientation at all.

 No wonder you pretty much drank your life away, no offense. There’s just no reason to do anything else. That’s why I see you as having true freedom. You don’t answer to anyone and there’s nothing to compare your life to or progress towards. You’re just here, doing what you want.

There’s plenty of reason to do other things. The drinking for a long period of time was counterbalancing major depressive disorder.

Matrix said: 

Okay disregarding my previous post on this thread. 

The purpose of life? In all honesty there is no purpose in life. No life is created for a singular purpose. Life exists simply because of a chemical combustion that happened billions of years ago. Aside from the scientific point of view or the ''realistic point of view''

Debatable (tis why I is here).

Religiously God had created people to serve him and do right in his holy commands that were passed down to moses. Like treat people how you want to be treated ect.

Well I like to think God created us to have a loving relationship. Someone who can pop things into existence with a thought doesn't really need servants. He may want it (but not need). 

To be fair in all honesty there is no purpose to our life. We live and we die and thats it. So make every single precious moment of your life count, because you only have 1 life as we know it.

Debatable. But this life sort of sucks (even if I were to get rich). So "make it count" doesn't apply. The best part of my life rn is BT. 

Or instead you can waste your life being religious serving god with stupid self sacrifical seromonies so then you are granted an after life or granted better fortune in life.

There you go... "Waste my life"?. You are confused. I thought about "what if there is no God". I have 2 options. 1. Kill myself (which I tried and was miraculously spared = more to reason I believe). 2, Live as if there is a God and make myself a somewhat sacrificial life (work towards helping others while providing myself life's needs).

Although, mentioning the miraculous failed suicide should give a hint of how I don't have to just "live as if there's a God". Because I've actually seen many miracles in my life... 

By my "needs" I mean I want to meet at least to the yellow (love and belonging). I have physical, spiritual and emotional needs.

1. Physiological needs

These are biological requirements for human survival, e.g. air, food, drink, shelter, clothing, warmth, sleep.

If these needs are not satisfied the human body cannot function optimally. Maslow considered physiological needs the most important as all the other needs become secondary until these needs are met.

2. Safety needs

Once an individual’s physiological needs are satisfied, the needs for security and safety become salient. People want to experience order, predictability and control in their lives. These needs can be fulfilled by the family and society (e.g. police, schools, business and medical care).

For example, emotional security, financial security (e.g. employment, social welfare), law and order, freedom from fear, social stability, property, health and wellbeing (e.g. safety against accidents and injury).

3. Love and belongingness needs 

After physiological and safety needs have been fulfilled, the third level of human needs is social and involves feelings of belongingness. Belongingness, refers to a human emotional need for interpersonal relationships, affiliating, connectedness, and being part of a group.

Examples of belongingness needs include friendship, intimacy, trust, and acceptance, receiving and giving affection, and love.

Its your choice be wise and realistic or be a stupid sheep and believe in a religious indoctriniation system that is used to control the masses. Making it much more easier for those in power to empty your pockets unknowingly. *cough* taxes *cough*

Was this to bait religious people? I wasn't even Christian to start (I converted). You can look down on my way of life but I could too. You think you are better for not caring about philosophy and the meaning of life? Apathy is the new edgyness. 

Some men fall for love of money
Some men fall to sex
Some men make false religion
Comfort and protection
Some men they'd die for duty
Die for family
But I'd rather drink the power
And call it loyalty

I like the way it makes me feel
I'm free
I like the way it makes me feel
I like the way it makes me feel
I'm free
I'm free yeah

There's nicer homes to live in
Safer streets to roam
But when you climb the ladder
There's nothing you can own
This ghetto's my cathedral
This gun my eucharist
I take the offering
And I decide what sin is

I like the way it makes me feel
I'm free
I like the way it makes me feel
I like the way it makes me feel
I'm free
I'm free

I like the way it makes me feel
I'm free
I like the way it makes me feel
I like the way it makes me feel
I'm free
I'm free yeah

The way it makes me feel
The way it makes me feel
Yeah

[Outro]
Well I'm free
Well I'm free
Well I'm free
(Why don't I feel free...)

Spatial Mind said:

Our components have a purpose, it's no fluke. There's a reason your hands are like that, it's meant to be that way.

How important is our pinky finger really, and why couldn't we have had hands that still allowed for advanced articulation in a different way? 

What is the purpose of our tailbone at this point, it's basically vestigial? 

Why is the human race losing it's fangs, other than as an expression of how that trait doesn't have Darwinian consequence anymore?

The tonsils have a function with the immune system, but removing it isn't of much consequence either, so is it really much of a purpose? 

The appendix, why do we need that now? 

What is the overall purpose of Wisdom Teeth? 


Not every part of us important, but it may be one day or it may have been at some point. Our form is in flux, as it has always been, and preceding humanity were the forms we came from like a slowly occurring chemical reaction, and all of these processes happen unconsciously. 

With the chance occurrences of different chemical reactions hitting the right balance to support life the fluke chance of it has been cradled here, on one planet (that we know of so far). There need not be a designer for any of this when this one planet is the byproduct of tons of chance occurrences no differently from any other planet, and when you make comparisons across the scale of the universe we're nothing really beyond an oddly cultured quirk of cosmic dust, similar to when you let some food sit out for too long and it starts to cultivate life based on the surrounding conditions. 

Even automatic behaviors we have can often betray us, be it outdated features of the brain that once helped us survive or even weird tics like hiccups. 

tpp said: 

SpatialMind will love this.

Why would quantum physics one day indicate your mindset has a physical effect on reality..? You should reject this notion based on Occam's razor in lieu of a way to test your hypothesis. There's no reason to think it's your mind that alters the double slit experiment or anything like that.. Mind is not needed to explain anything there. It's like saying it was ghosts or fairies... there's about as much evidence for those.

Because observation affects the quantum state. The intent of observing. That could be just part of the whole shtick. Not sure how ghosts or fairies tie into this.