Tampitump

Good thing we don't sit around basing our lives around all of the things that MIGHT, or COULD exist. That could be damn well anything and everything you could dream up. We judge propositions based on what evidence there is in support of them. If there is no compelling support for it, you don't accept it. Its just that damn simple. The debate has been over for a very long time as far as I'm concerned. The topic should have been dropped, and disbelief assumed after the first conversation like this was had. It should not require this many repititions of this argument to finally put this topic to rest. Its a very simple concept, and people apply it to every other claim every single day without issue. Yet, the religious/god belief somehow puts on the blinders for people.

It depends on what you mean by the "religion advocating" something. There seems to be a huge difference, to my mind, between doctrinal advocacy of of something within a religion, and the adoption of certain positions by religious institutions, people, or movements. The former seems to be static, more dogmatic, unassaible to believers. The latter seems to be more dynamic, but yet, not a bit more rational.

Abby Martin is an idiot. She used to be a 9/11 truther, and her reason for not debating Sam Harris on Islam was because "he was a neuroscientist", and therefore not in the correct line of work to be speaking on foreign policy. Her bias is not her downfall, her stupidity is. Just my opinion.

Not a big fan of Nye. He's got some good points, and some not so good points. Idiotic on many social and political problems. In science, he's okay, but no Carl Sagan. Tyson > Nye. He's definitely one of the best science communicators we have right now. All the others are "new atheists" and have no hope for making in to the household of the general public. I think Tyson is a great asset to the scientific community in that he presents himself as believably passionate about the pursuit of science and critical-thinking, and when pressed about it, tends to denounce religious/dogmatic type thinking in very forthright, but respectful and subtle ways. But still, he is no Sagan either. That's my opinion on them both.

I'm just going to state what my plan was going into this education endeavor, and you guys can tell whether or not its sound, or the extent of how delusional it is: 1) Get myself back into college. (I chose community college both because it was cheap, the community college I chose was the Princeton of community colleges, and because it offers a guaranteed transfer to any public university in my state upon completion). 2) Major in something useful that could provide auspicious job prospects on the bachelor level, and also something I would be interested in. (I chose computer science) 3) Minor or do interdisciplinary studies in the area I might like to pursue a PhD for. (My plan is to transfer to my state's flagship for their ever-expanding neuroscience program) 4) Pick up undergraduate research while at state flagship in area I want to pursue PhD for. 5) fall back on my undergrad area of study if PhD does not work out. Okay, tell me where I'm delusional. Thanks.

I've had them. I still want the scientific education.

Nice. Please explain. This should make for interesting discussion.

No, I did speak to him outside of class.. He doesn't do research, and has no interest to. I tried to pick his brain. I'd like to have some good letters of recommendation for my application, you know. But I soon realized in the conversation that I was using more academic and scientific words than he was, and he didn't seem to track much of what I was saying. Perhaps that may be because academia is different than I perceive. I know I don't seem like a very professional person, but I can be. I just don't filter myself on internet chat boards much. Lots of emotions here, and its nice to take it all out of some dudes on a forum who I'll never meet. Lol I would like to get into a neuroscience program though. My interest may not necessarily be to be a life long academic, but I would like to contribute to research in the field, and also to become something like a popular science author. That's always been kind of a dream of mine. There isn't a whole lot of popular science out there written for neuroscience or the brain like there is for other subjects in science. It is increasing, but there is still a void for it.

I've tried to provide you with an understanding of my life, my relations with other people, and my issues. You don't get it, but then how could you. There's nothing of my life that even partially resembles anyone else's. I don't even really know how to start explaining a day in the life of me. Its strange and unfulfilling. I can never seem to make friends because people already have friends. I can never seem to get a girlfriend because girls already have boyfriends. I can never seem to gain entrance to a club because they already have club members. I can never seem to be recognized for any accomplishment because they already have honorees. Etc etc etc. There just seems to be a world out there that is closed-door to me. I can get close to it, peep through the windows, but I can never seem to gain entrance to it. Everyone else moves about just fine. It would be nice to have a friend who seeks my friendship as much as I seek theirs. But everyone's already got what they need and no room for more. I'm just shit out of luck. I guess I arrived a little to late to the party.

Yet you get pissed at me for making accurate evaluations of myself.

People do phds all the time for the reasons I mentioned. Hell, some people get into phd programs only to switch departments. My current c++ professor has a phd in particle physics and decided on a whim to do his phd. He got into Vanderbilt just fine, and finished just fine. You also assume I'm not going to try to pick up some undergrad research experience whle at my state's flagship. That's the whole reason I'm going to try to go there. They have a stellar and growing neuroscience research program. I'd bet that a big portion of people who go for phds don't have any more ambitious or auspicious answers to these questions than I do. Who says I won't develop a love for research and academia. Most people stretch the truth on their applications/resumes anyway to make it seem like they are more ambitious and experienced than they really are. As stated earlier with my c++ professor. He has a phd from one of the best schools in the world, but he doesn't strike me as someome who particularly gives a shit aboit physics in general.

Total misrepresentation and straw man of my position. Just because my motive for wanting a PhD is to have one doesn't mean I will not be serious or professional with my studies/career. There are plenty of people who have done PhDs just to have them. Brian May from queen is one of them. I have a serious question though. How relevant does one's undergraduate degree to their chosen PhD program need to be. The reason I'm doing computer science now is to have a good foundation for job prospects. I planned on declaring neuroscience as my minor when I get to my state's flagship.

Is the reason why people look at me like I'm speaking in tongues most of the time because I'm stupid and they are smart, or because they are stupid and I am smart?

Thank you. My self-deprecation is often a tactic I employ to provide myself with consolation for when I fall short of other people. I tell myself I'm worthless from the beginning, I feel much less sting from failure. I used to believe much too highly in myself, only for my self-esteem to be destroyed by utter failure. The verbal disclaimers help me cope. That's not joke at all. It's also a form of self-punishment for my past faults. I'm furious at myself for being so stupid, lazy, and absent-minded in the past. I can't seem to get over it. It kills me. I have never seen my pedigree of past stupidity and failure matched by another person I've ever met.

I'll be honest. I just want a PhD to have a PhD. I know that's not a "good reason", and any person in the university sphere would lecture me about that. My only answer to that is fuck you. While I am genuinely interested in the brain and neuroscience, I really do want to achieve a PhD because I want to achieve a very high level of education. neuroscience would be my choice of programs. My plan is to achieve a solid background in computer science in my undergrad work, but also get involved in some neuroscience research at my state's flagship (which they do quite a bit of), and possibly minor in neuroscience. That way my prospects in the comp. sci field will be solid should the academia thing not work out. Again, I'm just speculating and talking straight out of my ass here. I'm still waiting for an answer from CharionY as to how neuroscience is a non-prestigious field. You can consider me like a Hitchens type off hawkish, rude, bad manners, but with a mind more interested in science.

I'm sure all of that will inevitably rule me out. You have to start young being smart and accomplished, or the world doesn't allow you to.

How so? As to the career outside of academia, I'm currently majoring in computer science. My state's flagship offers minors and interdisciplinary majors with neuroscience concentrations. I figured the comp. sci. Could give me decent job prospects outside academia. I'm just spit balling in this thread really.

This one girl in the library today wouldn't quit staring at me. I couldn't make out what emotion the look on her face was expressing. She seemed not to be phased by me looking back dozens of times to see if she was still staring at me. But gosh, she was HOT! Wow. Very good looking girl! It didn't feel right to be stared at like that. I just didn't like the feeling. I seems to make the girl's attractiveness evaporate for me. I like it better when they act as though your existence is of no concern to them, and that your non-existence might even be a slightly preferable situation. It makes them more magnificent to worship. Lol... When they stare at you, they look like a sappier sap than you. Lol

In half my modes, I'm intelligent. The other half I might as well be brain dead. But the point of the thread was to discuss smart, or perhaps well-educated religious people. I was saying this because I personally know a lot of them. The people I mentioned are ones who I wouldn't put my wits up against. Most have advanced degrees in the sciences, law, or business. Yet, they unequivocally hold beliefs that my brain can dismantle with a few simple arguments. Perhaps their success in academics and life in general is due the fact that they have souls and I don't. Lol

Europeans had to purchase technology from the Muslim world to be able to sail the Atlantic ocean during the Atlantic exploration period.

Both. I want financial security. I always thought that was a fucking dumb ass question for people to ask honestly. Of course I want to make good money and have a good life. I can want that whilst still being sincere about the science. No offense. Most of the average or less prstigious schools don't even offer Phd programs for neuroscience. My state's flagship doesn't. I don't want to go to a two-bit college for this. It's not like I'm aiming for Harvard or Stanford or Princeton or Yale or MIT. I'm looking at schools with SOME prestige, that often produce quality scientists, but I don't care to have the Havard level. Schools like Carnegie Mellon, William and Mary, Vanderbilt, Duke, UC/LA/Berkeley/Irvine/etc.. All of these are solid schools that are every bit the quality of the above mentioned ivies, but might perhaps be more realistic for me to gain entrance to (at least some of them). Sorry for the offensive language MigL

What do I need to do to make myself likely to be accepted into a good school's PhD program? And what good schools should I look into? I'm wanting to go private instead of public for my graduate school choice. Are there any good schools closer to the prestigious level that I might have a chance at? Please share them. Thanks.

Not helpful. Lol

For the past few years I have wanted to pursue a scientific education, specifically in neuroscience. But I know that there are immense problems that I currently face (and will face) in pursuing this goal. The first problem is my terrible academic past. I barely passed high school. After high school, I went to a small, local, four-year university where I failed out. I got placed on academic suspension because I spent three years there, failed everything, and never made it beyond freshman status. I spent four years in the workforce before I concluded that i wanted education, and decided to go back to college. Actually, I had acquired the desire to pursue a science education a couple of years before going back. Deciding to go to community college was the first step towards this goal. I'm currently a sophomore in community college majoring in computer science. I'm set to transfer to my state's flagship next fall (if all works out). My cumulative GPA at my current CC is 3.74, but when combined with the GPA from my former college, it is still horrendous. If I'm getting a "scientist's" education, this means a PhD program. I don't want to go to a two-bit school for this. I doubt any serious schools will touch me in light of my past failures. I'm looking at schools like Vanderbilt, Carnegie Mellon, and Duke for the PhD. The other problem is that I understand that these types of careers like neuroscience are pretty spotty, and only really pan out for the brightest and most accomplished. I doubt a PhD in neuroscience would even qualify me for a job a Books a Million. It's either you succeed mightily, or you make it nowhere. Maybe I'm wrong. If so, correct me. What should I do? Give it up? Pursue it? I'm really just a kid in his bedroom dreaming at this present moment.

No I'm not. I have no knowledge of the statistics on this matter. I'm not even sure what statistics you are talking about. I meant for this to be a colloquial, casual topic. Not an overtly "sciency" topic. Talk about some of the smart religious people you know and what you think the culprit(s) for this smart person's religiosity is/are. For me, it was the fact that I felt (and still do) dumber than virtually everyone in my high school, but virtually all of them still believe in nonsensical religious bullshit despite being much more capable, accomplished, educated, and intelligent people than myself. I suppose this also raises the question as to whether or not atheism = smart. I will be the first to tell you that I feel overwhelmed by pretty much every other person in the world when it comes to intelligence or wits. But most people just don't apply reason to their preferred beliefs about the supernatural.