http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ Collection of Thoughts Tag: thoughts... en Tue, 06 Jan 2009 14:22:38 +0000 http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-21014 Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:52:17 +0000 Beckett 21014@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>A scientist who says he knows everything... that's a contradiction in terms. If he knew everything then what's the point in being a scientist? Scientist is simply another word for investigator. </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-21012 Tue, 11 Dec 2007 15:21:51 +0000 starion 21012@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>Science and medicine are very busily informing us that they know all things...or that they are the ones who know the most of everything... They are not GOD nor will they<br /> ever be GOD, but it will be interesting when science goes as far as it can go and discovers GOD. I want to be there.... </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-21006 Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:36:16 +0000 Beckett 21006@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>"I am going to comply or not to the results of that study, because someone wants me to or because I do not like someone giving the study... I will"</p> <p>Science takes that into account by taking in a great number of volunteers and payed subjects as well.</p> <p>"also state that studies are skewed by the ones who give the study..."</p> <p>Which is why the scientific method is so methodical. In fact the scientific method is designed to present the facts independently of the bias in the person seeking those facts. That's the whole purpose of science.</p> <p>"What I discovered was that food companies were preparing to promote women working who bought pre-made meals in order to feed the families because they had no time to prepare meals from scratch and that these companies were going to make huge profit when women were forced into the workplace."</p> <p>The science stops where the ambition starts. Science will present them with the accurate facts. What they do with those facts is up to them. But if they do not properly follow the scientific method then they will not wind up with accurate facts.</p> <p>"...and that no matter how you try to ignore the body....or its feelings...it will finally get your attention. In fact, with a body, the more you ignore symptoms, the more serious they become"</p> <p>Which is why a good stoic will not ignore their emotions. Is that what you thought a stoic was?</p> <p>"Science once said the earth was flat and people believed..."</p> <p>You speak of science in the metaphorical sense. In truth you don't really mean the discipline of science itself but merely common knowledge or public opinion. Be careful not to confuse your metaphore with the actual science, which would be careful not to make such a big judgement without coming to that conclusion entirely with hard evidence.</p> <p>Of all the disciplines of enlightenment that have been invented throughout the ages science by far has come closer to the truth than any other. </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20996 Mon, 10 Dec 2007 14:53:53 +0000 starion 20996@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>Science once said the earth was flat and people believed... Science is not the end-all, be all. fundamentally science is desperately trying to explain what we are, why we are, causes and responses... and after all of this time, science cannot explain why the human being has electricity in the body, from what organ (there is none), why the brain has EEG's or the heart has EKG's. Do you have an explanation as to why it hurts so bad when you hit your funny bone, which isn't so very funny? Or how there can be electrical impulses in your brain? Or in your heart? We are discussing your body after all...you live in it...splain yourself to me... </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20995 Mon, 10 Dec 2007 14:49:01 +0000 starion 20995@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>Human beings live in bodies and bodies experience feelings and emotions. Yes you can reduce stress. Yes you can make yourself mellow... But I guarantee you a toothache is going to create stress in any stoic....that arthritis will hurt, throb and ache and cause the greatest of stoics to reach for a pain reliever...and that no matter how you try to ignore the body....or its feelings...it will finally get your attention. In fact, with a body, the more you ignore symptoms, the more serious they become... </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20994 Mon, 10 Dec 2007 14:46:00 +0000 starion 20994@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>Yes...science is an opinion based on a series of "facts". I will also state that if I am the object of a study, I am going to comply or not to the results of that study, because someone wants me to or because I do not like someone giving the study... I will<br /> also state that studies are skewed by the ones who give the study...<br /> Years ago I was part of an opinion poll. The poll was being given by food companies testing some of their products before presenting them to the open market. the object was to find out if housewives would buy pre-made foods instead of taking the time to prepare them, if the foods were tasty, and what price would a housewife pay for these products. I was paid $10 per day to show up....taste the product, make comparisons, etc.<br /> I needed the money...was willing to do this... What I discovered was that food companies were preparing to promote women working who bought pre-made meals in order to feed the families because they had no time to prepare meals from scratch and that these companies were going to make huge profit when women were forced into the workplace. There was an agenda... a purpose and when we all discovered what it was, we went along with it.... </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20993 Mon, 10 Dec 2007 07:01:45 +0000 Beckett 20993@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>"Studying people can thus only be done statistically, but reducing people to statistics and numbers is one of the real problems in society."</p> <p>However that's both your own opinion and irrelevent to the matter at hand - Which is whether the statistics are ACCURATE or not.</p> <p>Lets run the emotion test through the same scenareo of the scientific process:</p> <p>Scientists notice that sometimes people get angry and wish to know why.</p> <p>They investigate 1500 people of both genders and of various ages, nationalities, cultures, states of health, etc.</p> <p>During the investigation they notice on a line graph they created that people's stress levels tended to rise when people's anger levels did and that they tended to drop when the people's anger level dropped.</p> <p>Based on this information they suspect that stress might be the cause or one of the causes of anger.</p> <p>Now if this is true they reasoned that most people's anger levels should show a decline after they've been given some R&#38;R.</p> <p>So the scientists select 800 people and observe them one and off, making visits and check ups for one month. At the end of the month they tally and graph their average level of anger. Then somehow they manage to pay a two month's vacation for those 800 people. Then when those two months are over they do their check ups again and calculate the people's average level of anger.</p> <p>Along with this the scientists also selected 500 hardworking underpayed residents of the place where they sent those people. Beforehand they interviewed each of them, had them take tests, tallied and calculated their average level of anger. Then when they had checked the 800 other people, they also calculated the average level of anger for these 500 people as well.</p> <p>The results showed that 90% of the 800 people showed a significant drop in their average anger level by the end of the two months. However the hardworking underpaid residence of the place they were sent to showed a pretty steady and high level of anger.</p> <p>Over the next 5 years they conducted this same experiment 5 times over. By the 6th year they spent 3 months carefully going over and comparing the results from each experiment. Each time a drop in stress was soon followed by a drop in anger.</p> <p>Finally based on this long and grueling investigation they conclude that stress is one of the primary causes of anger. Upon that they then published their notes, records, and results to the doctors everywhere. </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20992 Mon, 10 Dec 2007 05:34:51 +0000 shin 20992@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>On an individual basis an experience is not repeatable because the experience has changed you. Take a loud noise, an exhaust misfire for example. The first misfire may startle you, the next one not, and a while later you may not even hear it.</p> <p>Studying people can thus only be done statistically, but reducing people to statistics and numbers is one of the real problems in society.</p> <p>AFAIK, the casue of emotions, or what gives rise to them has not yet been resolved. The best theory I have come across is that it is a quick (instantaneous) evaluation of a situation based on deeply held, including unconscious, attitudes and beliefs. </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20991 Mon, 10 Dec 2007 03:38:13 +0000 Beckett 20991@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>"the state in which they arise is not repeatable"</p> <p>I don't know how you justify this.</p> <p>"emotions can arise from seemingly nowhere and may require immediate attention"</p> <p>The key word there is "seemingly."</p> <p>So I don't know where you coming from making these two statements. Scientists CAN and DO study how people emote and what causes emotions.</p> <p>"Are stoics Christians in disguise, or vice versa? "</p> <p>Stoicism is closely linked to Christianity. Consider Paul of Tarsis for example. Alot of his life reflected the stoic way. Even though it is evident that he could be easily set off emotion-wise. </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20988 Mon, 10 Dec 2007 03:26:24 +0000 shin 20988@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>Now THAT is a cumbersome process! You overlook two things:<br /> 1) emotions can arise from seemingly nowhere and may require immediate attention<br /> 2) the state in which they arise is not repeatable<br /> both factors make it impossible to apply the scientific method and do research in the same way as it is done with material items.</p> <p>From Wikipedia:<br /> A primary aspect of Stoicism involves improving the individual’s spiritual well-being: "Virtue consists in a will which is in agreement with Nature." This principle also applies to the realm of interpersonal relationships; "to be free from anger, envy, and jealousy", and to accept even slaves as "equals of other men, because all alike are sons of God."<br /> "Stoicism's prime directives are virtue, reason, and natural law."</p> <p>Substitute God and Bible for nature and natural law, and we have something that sounds almost like Christianity. </p> <p>Are stoics Christians in disguise, or vice versa? </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20987 Mon, 10 Dec 2007 02:35:40 +0000 Beckett 20987@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>"Ok, how does the stoic scientist figure that out? "</p> <p>The scientist doesn't have to be stoic. But science figures out how much attention a healthy person would give his emotions through the scientific process. First the scientists make direct observations, record what they see, conduct measurements and calculations, and do research. Then based on what they find they make the simplest guess that fits the facts (Occam's Razor.) In otherwords they make a guess with as few assumptions as possible. Then they how to validate this guess. Usually this falls into the forumal "If A is true then B should happen when C is manipulated." For example if a calculator is powered by light then it should stop working when the light is blocked. Then scientists manipulate "C" in a controlled setting or a setting that makes the results as unquestionable as possible. When its neccessary they sometimes compare what happens when "C" is manipulated to what happens in various cases when "C" is not manipulated. For example if it's light that gives power to the calculator then they would also manipulate the temperature in one case, alter the flow of air in another case, and change the color of the light in yet another case but in all cases WITHOUT altering the amount of light that reaches the calculator. Then they would compare what happened in these cases with what happened when they blocked the light from reaching the calculator. If in any of these other cases the power of the calculator was affected, then that would indicate that light itself is NOT what powers the calculator. Anyways after they do all this scientist then often redo the whole thing several times in order to avoid any misinformation caused by coincidence. After they do all that they carefully analyze the results from each time they affected "C." Finally after this whole thing is done scientsts come to a reliable conclusion. Either A is true or it's not true. After that they gather all their observations, research, results, analyses, and conclusions and publish them so that the world can learn about what they discovered. </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20971 Sun, 09 Dec 2007 21:22:22 +0000 starion 20971@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>You are right!...I apologize Shin! However I might remind you that while you are in body of man and have wife in body of woman, both of you come from the same place and share the same source. </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20969 Sun, 09 Dec 2007 16:17:02 +0000 shin 20969@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>One of the challenges is for women to learn to say what they want to say. This morning my wife asks "Have you done your QiGong?" I say "No". During the day it turns out that what she meant is "I would do QiGong with you if you haven't done so already."<br /> WTF? How is anybody supposed to know that? To exchange thoughts with such a being becomes a highly hazardous thing to do, and really, if I can avoid living in such a volatile world, I will do so.<br /> Many men are very well in touch with their feelings, but there is nothing in the ordinary man's life which would give him the idea that woman could handle it, or that they would listen to him.</p> <p>Look at your words! "So they think!". Are you going to listen to him, or are you going to hear your own thoughts? Please, just stay away from imagining that you as woman know what men feel. How could you, since we don't say anything!? </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20956 Sun, 09 Dec 2007 14:58:54 +0000 starion 20956@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>One of the challenges (problems) with adapting a pose with which to see the world, is that it is a pose and not a natural way of seeing. A child does what a child does without first determining how to do it. If a child had to analyze the best way to walk instead of practicing the art of walking, none of us could walk with ease and grace.<br /> I have met and worked with stoics and emotionless individuals...most of them are men.<br /> Someone taught them that men don't cry, so they stifle their emotions and end up robotic unfeeling and computerlike. When asked how they feel, they aren't in touch with that and reply "OK"... because men, they believe, can't feel emotions like weak women.<br /> (So they think!) So most often men try on different beliefs to see which one would fit because, of course, one must fit....intellectualism, stoicism...and a dozen different isms and lose track of who they are inside... If you don't know how you feel, what you feel, when you feel, or sensation, do you call that living???? </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20952 Sun, 09 Dec 2007 05:48:31 +0000 shin 20952@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>Ok, how does the stoic scientist figure that out? </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20951 Sun, 09 Dec 2007 04:44:49 +0000 Beckett 20951@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>Stoics don't. Scientists do. </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20950 Sun, 09 Dec 2007 04:18:54 +0000 shin 20950@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>How does the stoic figure out what "the proper attention" is? </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20946 Sat, 08 Dec 2007 16:56:34 +0000 Beckett 20946@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>Well obviously the best you can do is accept it for what it is and give it the proper attention it needs in order to keep you healthy. </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20942 Sat, 08 Dec 2007 08:06:46 +0000 shin 20942@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>"The stoic is not emotionless. He simply keeps his priorities straight.<br /> What's the best you CAN do?"</p> <p>It's your theory, you tell us. </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20941 Sat, 08 Dec 2007 06:07:16 +0000 Beckett 20941@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>If the emotion is there then it is part of life and so the true stoic will consider that. It is not himself that is responsible for that emotion but nature and thus the emotion should be given the proper respect the stoic gives to all the conditions of life. If acknowledging the emotion will lead to better health and thus a more productive life then the stoic will do just that. After all it's not anything the stoic has any say over. The emotion is there. To suppress it is like mutilating yourself. There's no changing this fact so what are you going to do about it? What's the best you CAN do?</p> <p>The stoic is not emotionless. He simply keeps his priorities straight. </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20940 Sat, 08 Dec 2007 05:37:33 +0000 shin 20940@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>So, if life is not improved by an emotion (whatever that means) the stoic suppresses it and pretends it isn't there? </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/965#post-20938 Sat, 08 Dec 2007 02:10:13 +0000 Beckett 20938@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>The only problem in life should be finding solutions. </p> <p>That of course implies two different meanings of "problem." The first meaning is used when I said, "the only problem in life..." Here I'm talking about whatever we should be conscerned with, or whatever deserves our attention.<br /> When I say "...finding solutions," the second meaning is expressed. In this case I mean "solutions" to the natural problems: starvation, poverty, murder, ra.pe, war, etc. </p> <p>There are two things in life: What you can do and what you can't do; what's possible and what's impossible. All we should be worried about is the situations we can do something about. Everything else is needless stress. </p> <p>Are you sick? Then go to the doctor. Are you in danger? Then try to escape it. Has something valuable been taken? Then either try to get it back or let it go. Tears, anger, sorrow, etc... permit these only when they're a tactic toward some noble end, namely the improvement of life. Again anything else is excessive torment. </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/5#post-8862 Sun, 15 Jul 2007 20:04:33 +0000 YetAnotherSeeker 8862@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>Star, I love your technical vocabulary e.g., "edit thingy"! </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/339/page/2#post-8437 Sun, 08 Jul 2007 19:55:10 +0000 starlight 8437@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>what do i look like, in the red dress?</p> <p>do not have any memory of ever wearing one...</p> <p>do have this stylish red, baby doll top that i recently got and wear...could you have mistaken that for the dress? </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/339/page/2#post-7860 Thu, 28 Jun 2007 22:51:46 +0000 starion 7860@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>But you are ever so much prettier than me in that red dress.... </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/339/page/2#post-7859 Thu, 28 Jun 2007 22:50:55 +0000 starion 7859@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>Oh Star you rascal you! </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/339/page/2#post-7824 Thu, 28 Jun 2007 19:14:26 +0000 starlight 7824@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>get a thread! :) </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/339/page/2#post-7821 Thu, 28 Jun 2007 19:10:16 +0000 starion 7821@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>MrYman: No one has ever set me on such a pedastal before. where have you been all my life??? </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/339/page/2#post-7715 Thu, 28 Jun 2007 02:53:37 +0000 MrYman 7715@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>ohhh, am i not your reality too?</p> <p>how real do you want me to be, my queen? ;) </p> http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/topic/339/page/2#post-7657 Wed, 27 Jun 2007 14:36:49 +0000 starion 7657@http://collectionofthoughts.com/bbpress/ <p>Whew! I am so relieved... I spent an entire week thinking you would never speak to me again. What agony! Misery. (too emotional??) OK back to reality. </p>