Hard News: We still died at each other's hand
140 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.
"But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also."
The SST are, I think, skim readers.
-
Is Paul Litterick a pseudonym for Rupert Murdoch then?
-
The SST are, I think, skim readers.
Nah. I want the good old Abrahamic version. Not one from some messianic goody two shoes nutter with voices in his head....
-
Nah. I want the good old Abrahamic version. Not one from some messianic goody two shoes nutter with voices in his head....
All god is, is a voice in your head.
The nutter's are the ones who listen and give it exalted status.
The good ole Abrahamic version is just an earlier model of crazy. -
An interesting article in a recent New Scientist magazine used brain scans to show that when you were thinking about God's view of certain issues the same areas of brain were used as when you were thinking about your own views. However, if you thought about the views of someone else different areas of the brain were used.
Well, I found it interesting ...
-
An interesting article in a recent New Scientist magazine used brain scans to show that when you were thinking about God's view of certain issues the same areas of brain were used as when you were thinking about your own views. However, if you thought about the views of someone else different areas of the brain were used.
Well, I found it interesting ...
Gah, I cannot begin to express how much I dislike that sort of neuroscience research. It's like someone who doesn't know anything about computers trying to describe semantic relationships between the contents of Word docs by the pattern of read/write activity on the hard drive.
Until we have a clearer idea of how brain activity corresponds at a concrete level to the content of thoughts and beliefs, studies like this are simply one step up from phrenology. The location or otherwise of brain activity may or may not have implications for how we understand how different kinds of mental states interrelate, but right now we really don't know enough to say what those implications are.
It's particularly stupid and pointless when used to try and "prove" obviously controversial theories (e.g. "God's opinions and my opinions are closely related in my brain") because there isn't enough hard science behind it to defend, so anti-science bigots end up with an easy target for takedown, allowing them to ignore genuinely problematic findings while they do. And let's not even get into the massive unspoken assumptions inherent in the interpretation of results (e.g. that a person's understanding of "God's opinions" wouldn't be identical to a person's own beliefs anyway...)
Sorry about the rant, but this is one sort of "research" that always gets my goat.
-
2nd Blue Moon is rising, and I know youse guys don't believe in it.
How else do you account for my Father winning AC/DC tickets or the missing beer and overly cautious teenager? -
Until we have a clearer idea of how brain activity corresponds at a concrete level to the content of thoughts and beliefs, studies like this are simply one step up from phrenology. The location or otherwise of brain activity may or may not have implications for how we understand how different kinds of mental states interrelate, but right now we really don't know enough to say what those implications are.
I agree. Much more research is needed.
Anyway what was the topic ..oh yes.. How can a person who uses arguments you'd expect to hear from someone's batty aunt be a minister in govt and no one says BOO? -
For the first time in my memory, Goff has said something sensible about crime - prevention beats cure, young kids must be a priority.
Despite Goff's shift, I doubt that any of New Zealand's so-called journalists will even attempt to actually take these ideas seriously.
-
would anybody be kind enough to unpack the provenance of that term "shroud-waving" for me?
-
It is British medical slang, for when a group of doctors oppose some change in hospital policy by saying that it will result in the deaths of patients.
-
Apropos of nothing - except, if you hear it or see it on your notes, runaway if you possibly can- CRTPH*
*(Circling round the plug hole) -
For the first time in my memory, Goff has said something sensible about crime - prevention beats cure, young kids must be a priority.
Despite Goff's shift, I doubt that any of New Zealand's so-called journalists will even attempt to actually take these ideas seriously.
Jesus fuck, George -- Perhaps journos will start taking Goff seriously when he starts being serious?
I know it's a seriously unfair bar to meet, but I really shouldn't have read this steaming load of pap in close proximity to Obama's squee-inducingly grown up State of the Union.
-
Jesus fuck, George -
Well, that's one for my book. "Ranapianisms."
BTW. Contributions / reminders are welcomed.Ta in advance SB. -
Well, that's one for my book. "Ranapianisms."
Add that to the CraigSlap (tm).
Why does Craig get all the best neologisms? Is he some sort of neologist sage?
Post your response…
This topic is closed.