-Submitted by David Drumm (Nal), Guest Blogger
In a recent interview, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin) rejected Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism as atheist. Instead, Ryan prefers the epistemology of Thomas Aquinas. Aquinas adhered to the correspondence theory of truth, which says that something is true “when it conforms to the external reality.” This sounds a lot like Rand’s Primacy of Existence wherein consciousness is subordinate to reality – wishing doesn’t make it so.
Rand’s and Aquinas’ worldviews quickly diverge after that brief congruence.
Aquinas claimed that certain truths were only available through supernatural revelation. Aquinas’ first problem is to resolve this supernatural transmission to a human mind with external reality. Calvin postulated the “Sensus Divinitatis,” but this revelation wasn’t available to Aquinas. How does one distinguish a supernatural revelation from a mere product of one’s imagination?
Rand’s Objectivism separates consciousness from the objects of consciousness. These objects exist independently of any cognition of them. Reality is not subject to the mind, any mind.
To postulate divine revelation is to postulate the divine, that is God. Aquinas wrote “The Five Ways” to prove the existence of God, of which, the second one, is the Argument from Efficient Cause:
- There is an efficient cause for everything; nothing can be the efficient cause of itself.
- It is not possible to regress to infinity in efficient causes.
- To take away the cause is to take away the effect.
- If there be no first cause then there will be no others.
- Therefore, a First Cause exists (and this is God).
This argument is self-refuting. If everything has a cause other than itself, then God must also have a cause other than God, so God cannot be the first cause. If the first premise is true then the conclusion must be false.
The worldview offered by Aquinas is inherently subjective, incoherent, and imaginary.
Has Paul Ryan ever received knowledge via divine revelation? If so, what was this knowledge, more tax breaks for the wealthy?
H/T: Theodore Schick Jr., Dawson Bethrick, p.l.e., Gordon H. Clark, Sarah Posner, Steve Benen.
Waving a ACLU observer sign, i enter the fray zone like the drunk who’s been thrown out of the bar.
Scientific comment. (pseudo). Symbiontism sounds groovy, even it we hold ourselves to that between human cells. And the microbes do live in intimate contact in the inter-cellular space. Grooving quite comfortably.
I presume (it again) that Dredd has his rubber boots on when he says there are lots of them not causing general infection of the pathological type in our contiguous interstitial spaces. Or otherwise such effects.
If they have been there for ages, which their presence in apes should be enough to establish that hypothesis for´now. Then to assume that they have had no interaction with “us” or vice versa would seem statistically stupid.
I’m not suggesting they are breeding with us, only effecting us. We know nothing about intracellular hormones, and little of those in larger distances. (Organ signalling and regulation).
Now Dredd does make a big “footprint”. But a little thought with my weak biological knowledge and at this hour, I will now submerge like the Loch Ness monster, and go to sleep.
The issue needs and deserves more thought. Not to deal out any Nobel prizes in advance, but who remembers the receptions accorded the Australian doctor who discovered the cause of ulcers; or the English doctor who labored in the cause of childless couples for 25 ridiculed years.
Let us raise our glasses. Thank god for them and Galileo. And the establishment can stuff the tower of Pisa up their rumps. Followed by the Vatican. And a few other institutions you can certainly list without my help.
pete 1, May 5, 2012 at 5:31 pm
Frankly
1, May 5, 2012 at 8:52 am
Something like 4 or 5 GOP Presidential candidates received divine revelations, specifically that Gawd wanted them to be President of the USofA. Each and every one of those people lost to Willard Rmoney. What can we learn about divine revelations from this
==========================================================
that god has a wicked sense of humor
================================================
================================================
Tru dat.
But JT has a wicked sense of what happens when they finally become the High Priest In Chief.
He offers hysterical proof.
Frankly
1, May 5, 2012 at 8:52 am
Something like 4 or 5 GOP Presidential candidates received divine revelations, specifically that Gawd wanted them to be President of the USofA. Each and every one of those people lost to Willard Rmoney. What can we learn about divine revelations from this
==========================================================
that god has a wicked sense of humor
Gene H. 1, May 5, 2012 at 5:04 pm
Also, you obviously don’t know what the word “eugenics” means using it in that context.
======================================
It has to do with the exudor primarily, i.e., the primary exudor wanting to determine all things logical for the exudee.
We will take a close look at it in the first
groupiegroup session.I guess Mike S will not be a part of it, but I do want that deep genie H to be a part of it, because that is hydrate on steroids.
A genie needing to be logical.
Gonna be a blockbuster!
Dredd,
Again, that you don’t infer properly is part of the core failing of your understanding of biology and logic. You can say that I imply something all you like but when I’ve specifically stated the counter to which you claim, your claim if of implication is null and it is by default your inference which is at fault.
Are you suggesting that quantum mechanics don’t apply to humans? Or that because most humans don’t understand quantum mechanics at all that none do to varying degrees? My, but you are descending into silliness, Dredd. Once again, not that you’ll let this bit of knowledge percolate through your belief structure, microbes don’t “do” quantum mechanics any more than they “do” literature. The practice of science and the application of science in a systematic manner (sometimes called engineering or applied sciences) is strictly the realm of human human culture. If you think otherwise? Get back to me when a microbe comes up with a new quantum theory or reports a novel quantum observation.
Why do you hate reality so, Dredd? And why do you insist in living in George Lucas’ fictional world? You do realize he’ll figure out a way to charge you for that sooner or later, right? Do you beat your wife in that fantasy world too?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Gene H. 1, May 5, 2012 at 5:03 pm
Straw man again, Dredd. I’ve never claimed exclusivity to being right. If you don’t like that I point it out when you are demonstrably wrong? Stop being wrong.
===========================================
You need to study the exudeogenics … what is coming out … not what you wanted to come out.
You are the exudor not the exudee.
Get back to the script.
Gene H. 1, May 5, 2012 at 4:56 pm
…
Microbes don’t understand QM [Quantum Mechanics]…
======================================
Neither do the majority of human beings.
Microbes “just do it”, most humans do not.
We are composed mostly of microbe cells and microbe DNA.
Why do you hate your Father-Mother.Mother-Father?
Hurry up with that
groupiegroup Mike S.Well I’m tired. Long since. As GBKs quote of GeneH which now seem obvious, show so clearly. Thanks GBK. Rapid reads and comprehension is not my thing, especially when tired.
GeneH came with some big words again so I skipped all after epistem…..
Just out of tiredness. Guess he’s generally irritated at all the crap floating here. Sink or swim. But I’m too tired to do either.
Beddy bye. Convenient excuse. At least the nightmares I’m reading about the 30s in Soviet are worse than here.
MIKES!!!!!
Excellent joke. You can’t help that we stand and pray outside the “holy of holies” (empty they say) with your name in gold letters. So let us call to order in your name the group. We can discuss what your ideologiy means, the scriptures remaining……….. Oh shit, there I go again.
Sorry, brain overload and diarrhea.
Good night all.
Also, you obviously don’t know what the word “eugenics” means using it in that context.
Straw man again, Dredd. I’ve never claimed exclusivity to being right. If you don’t like that I point it out when you are demonstrably wrong? Stop being wrong.
Gene H. 1, May 5, 2012 at 4:27 pm
Gödel’s ideas apply to systems at a holistic level, not individual components of the system. Just because at least one assumption has to be made in a system (and ergo a system cannot prove its own consistency) does not mean that parts of the systems cannot be proven.
=============================================
That is why you believe you are right and everyone else is wrong.
Eugenics is survival of the biggest fangs baby!
You could do as good as this sociopath at stand up comedy … with a little work: “One Man’s Junk Gene Is Another Man’s Treasure Gene?“, but you would have to take one hand off the “Orangutan genie” and keep both hands on the keyboard.
I totally love that brain scientist, Dr. Fallon, even though his logic escapes him.
Again, a system that utilizes a natural process – which QM is a natural process – is not the same thing as “doing” Quantum Mechanics. Microbes don’t understand QM even in the smallest fractional sense of the term understanding. They don’t even have the abstract thinking skills required to understand the symbols used to define the Uncertainty Principle or the Exclusion Principle much less understand the concepts of the principles proper. Science, both the application of the Scientific Method and the body of accumulated knowledge that is science, is solely the domain of higher order intelligences. Which, until higher order intelligent alien life is discovered, means science is solely a product of human culture, including QM. Your irrational beliefs, notwithstanding, Dredd. If you want to belong to the Church of Star Wars, you go right ahead, but what you preach isn’t science. It’s science fiction.
idealist707 1, May 5, 2012 at 3:29 pm
Dredd,
I missed your photon comment. As well as those by others, see above.
I will accept willingly the hypothesis. And wonder if anyone has done an energy balance on the brain. It consumes, it is said. 25 percent of our oxygen and presumably 25 percent of our energy. That’s about 75 watts I believe. Not much, about what an old laptop would consume.
So can we assume that not if the energy consumed is less than that measured in heat radiation, where does the rest go.
If we further assume that the eventual light (photon) energy is not converted to thermal energy but used in chemical neuron processes, then we perhaps have some support for your supposition of photon signaling. Considering the possibilities it might be worth exploring.
The chemical-electrical solution which seems apparent is in a way crude and limiting speedwise. Nature made eyes sensitive to light. Other similar cell light capabilities are thus obvously within range.
Speaking of crude. OTOT, there was a tale of mankind trying to make rockets and not having discovered electricity and its uses, used instead chemical signals. Of course, it failed endlessly. Which demonstrates not the effectiveness of electricity, but the need for access to basic science knowledge. Galileo’s foreshadowing of Einstein 500 years in advance (the thrown ball on a moving barge and the one thrown on the quayside alongside), and the slit and the electron wave-particle phenomenom, and the EPR, and Black holes have no hair, etc.
As Feynman said: “He who thinks he comprehends quantum physics, doesn’t understand it at all.”
So please gives us more on the photo signaling brain cells. I would assume nano-distances. But it was “calculation” we were discussing, not longway signaling which is well measure. Even I presume reflexes—-although I have my doubts there.
============================================
Microbes have been doing quantum mechanics for billions of years, which IMO includes photon signaling (electron drops to lower orbit, generating photon; at the receiver end photon is absorbed by electron going to higher orbit, etc. etc. No loss of energy, or creation of new energy; obeying laws of thermodynamics. So there is no heat loss or increase to detect at that level of quantum mechanics. At least none we have the capacity to detect in the area of monitoring human brain activity – e.g. CAT & PET scans).
Their scientific prowess also includes being a symbiont to us for many reasons.
Something like 98% of our genes, it was said in holy science textbooks for years, were “junk genes”, but now we “know” those are the fingerprints, or footprints of microbes, not junk genes. What those genes are doing now, we just decided to check out. How brilliant.
The microbial cells within us, which outnumber our “human” cells 10 to 1, are in constant communication with our “human” cells (I make no distinction personally between “human” and “microbe” cells, because I understand that humans are all individual ecosystems composed of “cells and more cells”, working like hell to become one, in the best way possible – to keep us alive in the long run).
Anyway, the microbial form of communication, even though they know and use quantum mechanics, includes both chemical (molecules) and I hypothesize quantum (photons) signaling.
We can only prove, at this time, the molecular signaling because our tools are crude.
That is why I have used logic to hypothesize the photonic nature of critical brain signaling, for about two decades now.
As you can see, popularity is not what guides my scientific and other research:
(Scientific American). When I was in prison with Halderman and Erlicman (Nixon’s boys), I had to deal with the bully types who ran the prison, as well as the guards, Warden, and other officials who thought they ran the place.
I treated them all the same, which confused them.
lol
I’m going with metaset unless the band is composed of narcissistic onanists
A quick set theory pop quiz: Would a groupie of a group be part of the group or do we need a metaset?
gbk,
No correction required. You understood and restated what I was saying perfectly.
id707,
“Your logical tool, agreed designation, is based however on a belief. The belief that it relates to reallity.”
The descent into epistemological nonsense where all of reality is up for grabs. That logic is real and has definable boundaries that can be causally connected to observations of reality shows that logic is both real and relates to reality is manifest to any being possessing logic and it is only disputable on mystical/metaphysical grounds. You need to revisit the idea that “the” absolute truth being unknowable is not the same as absolute truths being knowable within a system. Gödel’s ideas apply to systems at a holistic level, not individual components of the system. Just because at least one assumption has to be made in a system (and ergo a system cannot prove its own consistency) does not mean that parts of the systems cannot be proven. That consequence of Gödel is often missed just as the point that the appearance of reality can differ depending upon the point of observation is a point often missed in the reading of Einstein.
Idealist707,
“I sure I must have misunderstood GeneH on this point in believing he meant logic did embrace it all.”
It seems that you probably did, at least to me this seems so. When Gene stated,
“To me this represents the fundamental dualistic nature of science: we seek ultimate answers withing a system – the universe – which will always have a mystery at its core that cannot be proven,” and also,
“How can you have the known without the unknown? How can you have the provable without the unprovable? Knowledge without mystery? What is knowledge but the pursuit of mystery? It is information devoid of context. I don’t think Gödel’s work points to a flaw at all. I think it points to a naturalistic duality necessary for our universe to be the way that it is.”
It’s a direct admission that there are limitations in any system; at least that’s how I read it. Don’t mean to put words in Gene’s mouth, so I will stand corrected if need be.
Gene,
We call it the Muse which has no logic either in its appearance or disappearance. 😉
Which takes me back to William Blake …