stonesofsauron

The dependency of young children on instructions of their parents. When we started walking, our hips narrowed, and due to our large brains we needed to birth children before their brain is fully developed (so it may squeeze through the birthing canal). So we create totally helpless and dependent babies, which lasts a while before more advanced cognition kicks in at around 7-10. Even then we are highly dependent because as psychological predators it takes us even longer to pick up our survival tools, Thusly cuz we walk upright, and are psychological predators, we have a really extended timefframe where we are highly dependant on others for survival. So we favor instinctually, our own SURVIVAL in formative years, by the simple logic of following the beliefs of someone who is alive and providing for you. If the issue is SURVIVAL, religion doesn't matter so much to that dependent child. That tolerance then later extends into adulthood, where people are like "whats wrong with it, I dont get why youd criticise how I grew up" "give me the child, I'll own the man" Freaky sad, but true... Religion itself is part of our predatory nature I suspect Gathering groups to hold similar views, is extremely powerful Better than big teeth. So we have a strong instinct to gather power, and children are a part of that, since they are dependent but will become powerful. So yeah, psychological power gathering predators, who have huge dependency in childhood cuz we stand upright, who see children as more power and manipulate it via religions to serve a goal of amassing a pliable and workable audience.

Well... I do believe to some extent in "forseen" motives of living things. We have a drive to have sex, because on some level we forsee its significance in bearing children. But it is messy and inexact. We don't ACTUALLY know it creates a kid, we just follow it, cuz thats how it evolved to be. We were designed to find it pleasureable cuz anything that didn't find it that way, didn't procreate and died off. So, foresight kind of makes sense but that iis only AFTER the effects of evolution (which collects harmonious results). But it is still messy and inexact. To say it is the same thing with the universe... Are you saying it had some emotional impetus within the boiling soup of a singulaity? I dunno... I think it is more likely that patterns build upon patterns, creating expansions of possibility, but at the same time it is getting diluted rapidly. So you have competing forces of expanding possibility and reducing possibility. The conditions where expanding possibility continues gets ever more narrow and sparce. BUT, on at least one planet, in the goldilocks zone, chemical complexity caught traction. Is that foresight? I think it can also qualify as dumb luck. Pretty remarkeable though!!! Cuz if eveerything was dreary in nature, you wouldn't even get that result. Its pretty remarkeable we are here. Is it foresight? Well, I think it is interesting that life caught on... I can't leap to it beng foresight. I mean look at the standard model, are you seriously going to PLAN that those base subatomic constituents are tweaked just perfectly, like a tv channel to create life on a specified amount of planets, or one planet? That is a LOT of effort. Pretty sure it was incidental, albeit rather interesting that it took root.

Well, my view on NDE's is that you are a) in shock - distorting what you deem plausible b) the chemicals in your blood are ceasing to be regulated - certain highs come about as a result c) you aren't actually dead until cells for the most part systemically turn necrotic - so NDEs are just EXTREME experiences given credibility cuz its "the closest you can get" but that is an assumption, not accurate Your skin is constantly dying, it form the upper layer you touch, then it flakes off. In a way the body becomes like that skin, and flakes away, to get digested by lil bugs and stuff just like dustmites live on our skin right now and eat dust. Its shocking that an entire body, that was once so solid,.essentially becomes transient... Especially since that spark of life is so precious and not entirely understood. I can't say what is true about death I can only surmise that the familiarities of biological existence become an impossibility All those lovely chemical reactions arent churning anymore I'd imagine that everything gets "heavy" and then settles... Before it does so, I imagine it gets highly imbalanced, and reactive, creating some NDE type stuff. That said, I'm not totally morose about death. There is a very very narrow possibility that the universe itself is constructed in such a perculiar way that just like it supports initial life that it may also support the incredibly unlikely, such as some form of continued utilitty of your original spark. I can only wildly speculate on that though... Like, say... instead of the big bang, there was a "big injection", and outside of the physics we know exists a cucoon of physics that isn't the same as our physical universe and is inaccessible. Say, in that cucoon chemical processes don't require physical matter, but exist as echoes, or shifting forms. Maybe you'd slip into some other sphere of existance, just like an echo. And by some crazy fluke, it holds form. I sort of believe in a "big injection" kind of thing, since imo the world is unlikely to begin entirely uniform, and so therefore, I feel its plausible there is a double image or weirdness with the big bang we haven't seen yet. If you ever watched the movie source code, the main character proceeds to live in an alternate dimension. In my view, you would not enter anything so elaborate, but maybe just sort of float like a jelly fish, in some chemical after image in an alternate version of physics. I wouldn't confuse that with any substantial idea of afterlife though. Lifes a bit of a miracle, if death was too, it'd be neat, but yeah...