Quartile

Thanks everyone, and nice post Paralith. Things bringing pleasure would have to be a product of the evolutionary process, but certain things would have to be a product of experience. Somewhere in the mind is a tally sheet that places importance to things. Sometimes tallies are made with thick black permanent markers, other times with white pencils (if you catch my drift). Emotional experience is definitely a large part of general experience, and I'm sure it has a lot to do with the tallying process. What is reproductive success worth to the human race in the era we live in today? I would say there are more than enough humans on the planet to ensure the survival of humanity even through a catastrophic event like an asteroid collision. I understand that the drive to achieve reproductive success still exists in each individual and I believe that therein lies a problem: how to reconcile our evolutionary past with a semipermanent future. Realizing that happiness can be found without piecing one's life together from goal to goal is a large step toward finding personal well-being and freedom. Often it is an aura of personal freedom coming from a person, simply being happy and sharing happiness, that attracts the opposite sex these days. The things you mentioned are still big players, but the most attractive personality seems to be the one that loves openly. In fact, the goal I was referring to in my example was acquiring only the resources necessary for self-sustainment. Currently I don't have enough money to do the things that I want to or think I need to do, but I have more than enough money to live. I don't currently have my own place to call home nor would I need one if my goal was simply self-sustainment.

right but the problem you were talking about here is one that started long before the man found out that his wife was cheating on him. the question to be asked is why was she cheating? that is a problem in itself. but the question as to what is necessary was meant to be asked at the point when the man finds himself with a cheating wife: what is his next step; what action is, as markus said, "necessary"?

What is necessary?

Finding wisdom is one thing and searching for it is another. Often when searching for one thing (wisdom, in this case) and focusing on it we lose track of all those other things that we could be finding. Good and evil is one of those non-existing dichotomies that we love to attach ourselves to. There is a middle ground between them where things are as they are, from any and every point of view. You can understand anything you want, but with more complicated things you do have to find trustworthy sources. How you operate is your own choice

The question is stated pretty well in the thread title, but I'll try to go deeper. I would like to make the distinction between reaching a goal for the purpose of satisfaction and reaching a goal for the purpose of personal continuation. There are goals that must be attained for survival such as feeding oneself enough food to stay nourished, but I think that these goals are few and far between when compared to the things that people strive to attain through goals that would bring immediate and/or short-lasting pleasure. So there are many unnecessary goals manufactured by the personal psyche to bring short-lasting happiness and there are few inherently necessary goals that are required for self-sustainment. This also brings in the question of an individual's necessary goals to satisfy self-sustainment in a systematic society like is being developed in urban areas around the world. Do biological goals change depending on where a human being lives? In other words, is it necessary to get a job if the only food you can find costs money? There are more ways to obtain food in an urban setting than through the front door of your local grocery store, but they are seemingly difficult. Do conscious and healthy-minded human beings function primarily to reach physiological/psychological goals in order to feel satisfaction? If so, where can the line be drawn between necessary and unnecessary goals? Is the blurring of the line perhaps the cause of so much unhappiness in the world (individuals feeling that multitudes of things must be accomplished over long periods of time in order to have a clear and happy conscious experience)? How often do people think to themselves "I just need to do this and then I'll be happy"?

The rules of logic also apply to philosophical physics. Any presuppositional concepts must be analyzed for validity and soundness before they can be used to build a hypothesis. it cant?

Haha no I didnt mean in an objective way, even though experiencing the aging of my own body is quite an objective experience of time if i do say so myself. By "subjective or otherwise" I was trying to say "if it does exist, then how ever it exists" because there have been some posts in the thread where people argue that there is some sort of grey area between being subjectively or objectively, at least I think? I hardly scanned all the posts lol

Im not sure if it has been said here or not and I am kind of in a hurry so I didnt read through ALL the posts, but... I think it is important, if we are to answer the question "what is time" (because thats the question here, isnt it?), to first answer another question. If time is existing subjectively or otherwise, it would be important to find out what exactly would happen if it were to not exist subjectively or otherwise. That is, what would "reality" be like if we were able to freeze one singular "instant" of time? Well, since the movement of matter is the only precept by which we can define time, all matter would necessarily have to be motionless in one singular instant, including light. But we already know that photons have a rest mass of zero and that they are always moving (at the speed of light, nonetheless)! This is apparently a catch-22. Regardless, I have always been predisposed to think of time as a function of change. Without change, time does not exist because there is nothing to quantify or qualify it by.

It would be impossible to say whether it is one way or the other without somehow isolating nature and nurture. Maybe males have more intellectual prowess because they see that males in the world are (arguably) more intellectual and thus it becomes a personal goal for these individuals to define themselves based on the norm... you never know.

Relative to anything inside the train or the train itself, the coin falls straight down. Relative to anything outside of the train, the coin is moving at whatever speed the train is moving and that velocity must be considered in addition to the acceleration caused by gravity. The direction that the coin falls is not straight down (as would be perceived by the man dropping it) because the man dropping it does not perceive himself moving. Try to consider also what would happen if the man were walking down an aisle in the train when he dropped it. Or maybe consider that hardly anything is ever truly at rest - while the train is chugging along on the earth, the earth is spinning on its axis and rotating around the sun. There may even be some motion of the solar system in our galaxy, or some motion of our galaxy in the universe.

You dont? What about trees?

Well as long as were going to be quoting ourselves.. I also think that a measure of the total negative entropy of an organism would suffice. How is this not a measurement of the effort that an organism expends to perpetuate itself? Is that not consciousness?

Not as much as you but I bet I could describe the basic mechanisms with legitimate accuracy Maybe to be conscious is to be aware of the relationship between you and your environment? That is, how do I sustain/benefit myself here so that I dont die? A good measurement would be an organism's black body radiation or an account of energy exchange with the environment. An apparent contradiction with the definition arises here. Whether or not a multicellular organism is readily aware of the full extent of their consciousness, the individual cells that make up their organs have to keep functioning for the whole organism to remain alive. So thinking with the brain is as conscious an act as digesting with the stomach - they both serve the same purpose. Is that any good? Tear it to shreds! lol

Hey man Im just asking you to level with me. My question does have to do with consciousness as I believe that leaving consciousness out of scientific studies of the brain is defeating the purpose. Aren't these things all caused by electricity moving through different parts of the brain?

iNow: I dont appreciate your post. From what high place are you talking down to me? I know plenty about the current state of science with regards to the physiology of the human brain and I have yet to understand why the most basic questions have not yet been answered. One of the most basic questions is the one I have asked here and it almost seems that science is lacking the initiative to come up with a solid answer to it: what function does electric charge serve in the human brain? Regardless, I am sure you meant well in your post. Thanks. If this post is speculative because of the nature of the question and its relation to unproven science then so be it, respond with speculations and theories. This does not make the question any less worthy of being asked, indeed I would say it makes it more so. zule: I am familiar with LTP and glutamate's roll in plasticity but I failed to make the correlation between these factors and memory storage. Is it possible, however, for glutamate to build new synapses on its own? I would think that it would be necessary for the synapse to be "activated" by electricity before it is "solidified" by glutamate... that is, we have to think a thought before it can become a memory? Fred: Yes that is a little clearer. I was really only curious about the precise use of the word "cascade" and wasnt sure if it was only a clever way to describe a "flood" of activity.

Thanks. I think I got the answer I needed but to clarify.. Could it be said that a thought existing at one time is physically represented by the charge distributed between neurons in the brain? Different injuries seem to travel at different speeds as well. Clean cuts can be painless for quite awhile. What does this mean?

Perhaps a real understanding of infinity would lack definition in our thoughts simply by virtue of definition implying finiteness. Regarding EEG waves and their nature as well as your last question... what if you rigged up an EEG wave machine to produce sound waves according to the EEG wave and let people try to think up some music? Then we really could hear our brains singing to us

What are the working physical definitions of thoughts and memories? I understand that this is an area of science that is still developing, but are there basic definitions that would work to physically describe thoughts and memories? More specifically, do thoughts arise from electrical signals being passed through certain areas of the brain? If so, would memories then be some neuron characteristics that would then be changed (by the electricity) to "remember" the thought?

Awareness is a fundamental cornerstone of evolution - even coding DNA is a form of awareness when you realize that cells are tiny processing units. I would say that the purpose of life is to grow in awareness and have fun with being alive. To be generally creative.

sorry! im leaving

Here it goes again... Mr Skeptic: There is an inherent problem with believing that any economy can run perpetually with this type of "fed magic." Money is supposed to be a means of exchange for real-world things, not something that banks create to speed up an economy artificially. As the economy spins faster and faster debt is reaching never before seen levels and eventually everything will come tumbling down - an economic collapse of much greater magnitude than the great depression. This system is not self-sustaining. Reference the last paragraph of my second post. Think outside the box. The question is: how will YOU get rid of greed? Do you have control of yourself, or are you retarded? Not to say that you are greedy, but the same applies to those who are. We have greater evolutionary potential than to be impeding the progress of ourselves and others by being greedy. Why dont the labor laws in the US apply to the way businesses handle employees who are not US citizens? Sweat shop workers are exploited in that, in the eyes of business, they are machines to which labor laws do not apply. I live on Earth. What is my cost of living? Do I owe something to someone by virtue of being born? theCPE: I was referring to living "in harmony with Earth" as sounding silly to hopefully bypass the need for someone to slap this label on my post. I specifically chose the word sounding because the way something sounds does not infer its meaning. Indeed, you have to actually involve your mind when you read posts. Living in harmony with Earth is necessary if we are to expect ourselves to remain on it for another five hundred years. How much longer will it be before the balance that Earth was in is completely upset? Look at the dustbowl and see the obvious repercussions of unrestrained capitalism. That is one example and there are many, many more. You are the one who is proposing what we would shift to if capitalism were to be abolished. I am only saying that capitalism is not in check with evolution. We have more potential than to be wasting it slaving away to the dollar. Who is trying to convince anyone to give up what is rightfully theirs? You? Regardless of what they think, people are special. And I have not yet met a single person who doesnt have the ability to exert their fullest effort, create with their wildest imagination, work to their highest ability, sweat through their determination, or cry out in great desperation, etc etc. It is when we limit these traits to one person or to an 'elite few' that we arrive upon the strange capitalistic belief that just because my great grandad was John Rockefeller I can walk through the alleyways of an inner city slump in my armani suit while smoking my cuban cigars and fancy myself some sort of superhuman who has managed to 'succeed' more than those who are less fortunate than I. Funny that it is these types of 'gentlemen' who run our government. No I did not write your post. The problem with ambition is that there is not enough of it. People are satisfied with living under the status quo, slaving to the dollar, and thinking only of themselves. We have evolved to this point through a long process of being on earth. How can we continue to evolve if capitalism would have that within 500 years there are no more resources to support us? 500 years is the blink of an eye in evolutionary terms..

Mr Skeptic: smarter for the human race. unless you would think that everything is just fine the way it is... granted, it is only seemingly necessary. the most "successful" economic systems to date have been capitalist. capitalism serves well to answer the question, as YT stated: "whats in it for ME?" transferring money from the rich to the poor could never happen unless the rich had some sort of moral backbone. it is the desire to do what is fair that needs to be brought alive. think outside the box.. first of all, i was saying in so many words that limited resources do not mix with rampant capitalism. and second, how can you say that we will never develop a method by which we could migrate to other planets? is terraforming completely impossible? are you well versed on the subject? oh right... considering the possibilities, this one is the best? humans killing humans sounds like backwards evolution. mindless greed and exploitation of other human beings. so evolved! the united states is a prime example of what those in the seat of world power should be doing! all hail capitalism! yes youre right I seem to have made a pretty bad err there. regardless, the $9 that is lent out is assumed to be redeposited into a bank somewhere and then $8.1 is lent out based on the $9 deposit. so a $10 deposit allows for a total lending of $9+8.1+7.2+... = $90. where did that extra $80 come from? why is there this much manipulation of the buying and selling of goods and services? surely it serves a greater purpose to the government than it does the individuals living under it. theCPE: Ah, more labels... I should have expected as much I thank you for responding to this rhetorical question. perhaps it didn't serve its purpose and you still have little understanding of the meaning I intended by it. considering that these things arent necessary, why are they here? what purpose do they serve? this thread is about evolution, and it would seem that all facets of human society should be included in a discussion about human evolution. if the fruits of capitalism are not necessary and they are causing the tree to run bare, why are we picking them? then you have failed to critically examine my post for meaning, especially in light of the topic. it is not "my thing." if YOU were the one "visualizing a circle of hippies sitting around a camp fire" then why would you assume it to be a sentiment shared between us? I only complain that people limit themselves in their goals and ambitions and the means they employ to succeed in realizing them, especially with regards to thinking "what's in it for me?" sorry, but who are you and what makes you so different and/or deserving of something special? why is it so hard to recognize the inherent problems with the human race at this point in time? no problem thanks for your take. bye. Sayonara³: No worries though. I could always hunt down his posts and do the same... but I wouldn't. I am sorry I made such an abrupt post. I have to admit that the topic set me off on a rant, albeit imo an applicable one. I definitely could have kept the clutter out of the thread if I had simply shortened my original post to the following: In short, I am of the belief that the evolution of the human race has brought us to understand many more things than we would like/are able to admit. At this point in time, many of these things that we understand as part of our human nature are moot as they have no place in the dealings of ruling authorities or the systems that have been installed by their hand. So in effect, we haven't evolved at all. We hardly hold ourselves accountable for realizing our potential as human beings.

exactly Fred, well put.

In reference to the first post.. Wouldn't it be smarter if we used our bountiful resources for everyone's good instead of for the few? i.e., why is capitalism necessary for effective conglomeration? Put yet another way, what would it take for everyone to work together towards a simple common goal like making sure that no one has to worry about their next meal? And this cant be simplified by naming it communism or socialism or whatever.. even in those economic systems it is difficult to get people to really work together... often times you end up with some fascist dictator slaughtering half the country before some "ideal form of communism" is ever established! Certainly the gap between the rich and poor could be bridged by some common human agreement rather than being constricted by the confines of regular economic definitions like capitalism or communism. Either we need to figure out a way to live "in harmony with earth" (i know it sounds silly..) or a way to travel to other planets so we can use them up as well. In other words.. what is the cause of the rush that the united states is in? why is it necessary to develop a country to the point that everyone is controlled by reality shows, flashy new cell phones, and the general desire to live a life in the shadow of the american dream? why is it so necessary that the country with the most "world influence" has the most bombs? innovation compounds the problem of capitalism to a higher degree than it seems: figure out a way to maximize your sales and minimize your costs and you will sell to wider audiences and reach a wider scope than you normally would have. then you will earn more profit and make the business even bigger, which will earn more profit, etc. thats all great for you and your family... and i guess its ok that you pay asians way under minimum wage to make the shoes you will sell for 20x the cost to americans... anything to make an extra buck right? doesnt capitalism breed the donald trumps of the world? and lurking behind the problem of finite earthly resources is the trick that the government allows to happen with the reserve rate. banks are allowed to lend out money they dont have at a ratio of $1:$9 money they have:money they can lend. so if person A comes to a bank and deposits $10, the bank is allowed to lend out $90 based on that $10 deposit. they actually create $80, and the $90 that is lent to person A will be given to person B as payment and put into person B's bank account. now all $90 of the original loan is paid back by person A to the bank allowing for more loans to be made out in a ratio of 9:1 to person C. so we are basically driving our already rapidly accelerating economy with more and more debt! If we are intelligent, it certainly doesnt show.

I apologize for the absence of explanation. I will give it a shot... Perhaps it would be better to word the statement "we are something collecting itself" instead of ourselves, though we are individuations of it. Sisyphus, this is not an application that I was aware of but it does indeed serve to describe the idea. I think the idea is best described as applicable to the long process of evolution that one bacteria (making up one node of a network of bacteria) undergoes as it grows into one human being which makes up one node on the human network.