3 of 3
3
Free Will is mostly an illusion, but still real
Posted: 20 November 2012 07:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 31 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  226
Joined  2012-09-10
GenerousGeorge - 20 November 2012 06:29 PM

Glad to see you are objective about this.

I don’t think you know what objective means.

GenerousGeorge - 20 November 2012 06:29 PM

I don’t think you know what AA really is.

I know it as well as you’ve described it.

GenerousGeorge - 20 November 2012 06:29 PM

Have you ever been to a meeting? Do you know anyone who is in the AA program?

No. No.

GenerousGeorge - 20 November 2012 06:29 PM

Why do you just dismiss AA out of hand, because of your aversion to Mysticism? Even if there is an element of mysticism, does that invalidate the whole process?

Its not one thing. Its many things. I told you some of the good things that I saw. And one of the bad things—the irrational part about “giving in to a higher being of your understanding”.

GenerousGeorge - 20 November 2012 06:29 PM

It appears to me that you just have a “knee jerk” when it comes to anything tainted by what you perceive as mysticism, hypnosis etc.

You should stick to content rather than vague statements about how I perceive stuff and how I “react” to those perceptions.

GenerousGeorge - 20 November 2012 06:29 PM

In fact, you dont seem to want AA to work. I predict you will completely disregard my personal experience in AA and the results I have observed in thousands of people.

I told you that self-fulfilling prophecies happen. And I think you agreed. And I think you agreed that this part of AA is a self-fulfilling prophecy. So I don’t understand what you’re having a problem with.

GenerousGeorge - 20 November 2012 06:29 PM

Just hypothetically, what if AA did work even with an element of mysticism. What if AA worked better than any purely logical method.

How would you find out that it does or doesn’t work better than “any purely logical method”? Are you suggesting that an organization tries using the “logical methods” to help people stop drinking? Are you going to include the parts that you described about AA involving social support?

GenerousGeorge - 20 November 2012 06:29 PM

(it does in my experience) If AA worked much better than the purely logical methods (whatever and wherever they are??) Would you still try to convince those who were no longer drinking that their belief in mysticism was evil and abhorrent and they would be better of drinking until they could solve their problem logically. People like me for instance.

I’ve already told you that people should solve their problems using the best knowledge they know how. If AA is that knowledge then so be it.

GenerousGeorge - 18 November 2012 11:45 AM

The results I saw show that AA works for 5% of the people that go into AA. I’d call that a failure. See this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YF72vvW-y3M

First you say it is impossible to have accurate statistical studies on AA and the next thing you do is quote me statistics.

Those stats are supposedly objective—according to said AA internal study—by objective I mean that they didn’t involve questions for people to answer. IIRC, the stuff you explained previously, which is the stuff I was criticizing, involved asking people questions, hence subjective.

GenerousGeorge - 18 November 2012 11:45 AM

What do you mean by “swimming upstream”? Are you saying that you were conflicted? (By conflicted I mean having two conflicting ideas.)

NO

What do you mean by “swimming with the current”? Are you saying that you weren’t conflicted anymore?

It is hard to explain. I don’t know, it’s just how I feel about my approach to life with AA and before AA. For now lets call it a psychological trick that has helped me with Alcoholism. Yes, “truth in lending”, I am puzzled why this “Higher Power” thing seems to help, however no other method did. I am a highly logical person with strong will power, but AA is the only thing that works for me.Soooo, I take what I need and leave the rest behind like lots of others.  and…...............  nobody is trying to coerce me into a further venture into their personal brand of “Mysticism” Not even the Born Again Christians who also happen to be in AA.

You haven’t described how you “feel” very well. So far you’ve said “swimming with the current” vs “swimming against the current”. The only thing I can parse from that is “not conflicted” and “conflicted”—and you said thats not it.


I don’t know what questions to ask you for you to describe it better.

 Signature 

—Rami Rustom

If you agree with my ideas, you’d enjoy these:

http://ramirustom.blogspot.com
http://fallibleideas.com/
http://groups.google.com/group/beginning-of-infinity/subscribe
http://groups.google.com/group/taking-children-seriously/subscribe
http://groups.google.com/group/rational-politics-list/subscribe
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Autonomy-Respecting-Relationships/messages

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 November 2012 06:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 32 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  109
Joined  2012-09-22

GenerousGeorge - 18 November 2012 03:45 PM

That if the people participating and getting benefit have not used reason as the total and exclusive process to achieve those results, they should abandon that process for one they can reason through, even though the results are less beneficial?

You replied ........ No. If a person doesn’t know a better way to solve his problem, then he should use the best way he knows how.

He should also criticize that “solution”. And with sufficient understanding, he will discover that AA is mysticism. Its irrational.

 

It seems to me our whole discussion can be summarized by our different views on what I call “A higher power of my own understanding” and what you call “Mysticism”.


You regard any process that involves irrational “Mysticism” as wrong and even aborrent. You seem to equate the “Mysticism” of AA with the “Mysticism” of religions such as Christianity. You also seems to believe that any degree of mysticism is just plain wrong (in any context) and that regardless of the reported beneficial results (by people like me) of AA, it behooves people who have had success in that way, to use their intellect to root out the illogical (evil) parts of the program and retain the “good” parts to achieve the same results.

You espouse this view as opposed to mine, which is to better understand the “Mysticism” part of the AA program and find a way to utilize it as a positive catalyst component that results in positive synergistc results better than any achieved so far by purely “logical” and “rational” methods.

Your view of what is “logical” and “good” as opposed to anything tainted by “Mysticism” which is “bad” seems impervious to any argument of mine.

I suspect you view the world more as “Black & White”, wheras I view it with shades of gray (and technicolor). I think we have a basic disagreement about our world views that cannot be resolved.

Okay ...... now you get to say .....  HA .......  so that means you give up?  LOL   maybe

[ Edited: 21 November 2012 06:17 AM by GenerousGeorge]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 November 2012 06:38 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 33 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  226
Joined  2012-09-10
GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 06:14 AM

You replied ........ No. If a person doesn’t know a better way to solve his problem, then he should use the best way he knows how. He should also criticize that “solution”. And with sufficient understanding, he will discover that AA is mysticism. Its irrational.

It seems to me our whole discussion can be summarized by our different views on what I call “A higher power of my own understanding” and what you call “Mysticism”.

No. Its not that *I* call it mysticism. Its that it *is* mysticism. Mysticism is irrational. Irrational is bad. If you want to be persuaded about this, or if you want to persuade me that I’m wrong, read Ayn Rand’s _The Virtue of Selfishness_, then post your criticisms (or questions) of the ideas in that book to http://groups.google.com/group/beginning-of-infinity/subscribe. I and others will discuss them with you.

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 06:14 AM

You regard any process that involves irrational “Mysticism” as wrong and even aborrent. You seem to equate the “Mysticism” of AA with the “Mysticism” of religions such as Christianity.

Mysticism is mysticism is mysticism, no matter where its found.

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 06:14 AM

You also seems to believe that any degree of mysticism is just plain wrong (in any context) and that regardless of the reported beneficial results (by people like me) of AA,

You’ve made a mistake. You said that your involvement in AA solved your problem. And now you’re saying that the mystical part of it *must* be there in order for it to have worked for you. How do you know that? How do you know that if you had done the AA, and AA didn’t have that mystical part, that it wouldn’t have worked for you?

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 06:14 AM

it behooves people who have had success in that way, to use their intellect to root out the illogical (evil) parts of the program and retain the “good” parts to achieve the same results.

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 06:14 AM

You espouse this view as opposed to mine, which is to better understand the “Mysticism” part of the AA program and find a way to utilize it as a positive catalyst component that results in positive synergistc results better than any achieved so far by purely “logical” and “rational” methods.

If you agree that that part is mysticism, you have to agree that you cannot figure it out. Why? Because mysticism does not correspond to reality. So, either you:


(A) Think that part is mysticism and cannot be figured out (since it doesn’t correspond with reality).


or


(B) Think that part is not mysticism and can be figured out (since it corresponds with reality).


Which one do you believe? A or B? Or do you disagree with what I’ve laid out?

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 06:14 AM

Your view of what is “logical” and “good” as opposed to anything tainted by “Mysticism” which is “bad” seems impervious to any argument of mine.

I suspect you view the world more as “Black & White”, wheras I view it with shades of gray (and technicolor).

I’ve been told that before. Do you think that is a criticism of me? Or a criticism of the people that say that to me? Before you answer, look at my blog. Also check out some of the 100 or so posts on this forum. And some of the 3,000 or so posts on the philosophy lists I’m on.

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 06:14 AM

I think we have a basic disagreement about our world views that cannot be resolved. Okay ...... now you get to say .....  HA .......  so that means you give up?  LOL   maybe

I disagree.


Two rational people in a disagreement will always reach the truth (given infinite time). Do you agree with this? If not, here’s another question. Why do you think that parts of our worldviews are offlimits to this discussion? Why do you think that you or I could not change a part of our worldview such that we are able to agree on this AA/mysticism disagreement?

 Signature 

—Rami Rustom

If you agree with my ideas, you’d enjoy these:

http://ramirustom.blogspot.com
http://fallibleideas.com/
http://groups.google.com/group/beginning-of-infinity/subscribe
http://groups.google.com/group/taking-children-seriously/subscribe
http://groups.google.com/group/rational-politics-list/subscribe
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Autonomy-Respecting-Relationships/messages

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 November 2012 07:00 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 34 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  109
Joined  2012-09-22

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 10:14 AM

I think we have a basic disagreement about our world views that cannot be resolved. Okay ...... now you get to say .....  HA .......  so that means you give up?  LOL   maybe

I disagree.


Two rational people in a disagreement will always reach the truth (given infinite time). Do you agree with this? If not, here’s another question. Why do you think that parts of our worldviews are offlimits to this discussion? Why do you think that you or I could not change a part of our worldview such that we are able to agree on this AA/mysticism disagreement?

Okay then, lets talk about my results with AA. That is what I have the most experience with.

1.) Do you think that my recovery from Alcoholism can become more effective if I root out any taint of mysticism from it and boil the results down to its’ purely logical elements?

2.) Do you know of an alternative process, organization or body of existing knowledge that could have achieved the same or better results than I obtained through AA?

Or, do you just object on principle to the mysticism you observe as part of the AA Program

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 November 2012 07:07 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 35 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  226
Joined  2012-09-10
GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 07:00 AM

Okay then, lets talk about my results with AA. That is what I have the most experience with.

1.) Do you think that my recovery from Alcoholism can become more effective if I root out any taint of mysticism from it and boil the results down to its’ purely logical elements?

2.) Do you know of an alternative process, organization or body of existing knowledge that could have achieved the same or better results than I obtained through AA?

Or, do you just object on principle to the mysticism you observe as part of the AA Program

You are again lumping all the parts of AA into one thing. And then you’re saying that the one thing **must** have all the parts in order to work. Recall our last two posts:

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 07:00 AM

You also seems to believe that any degree of mysticism is just plain wrong (in any context) and that regardless of the reported beneficial results (by people like me) of AA,

To which I replied:
You said that your involvement in AA solved your problem. And now you’re saying that the mystical part of it *must* be there in order for it to have worked for you. How do you know that? How do you know that if you had done the AA, and AA didn’t have that mystical part, that it wouldn’t have worked for you?

 Signature 

—Rami Rustom

If you agree with my ideas, you’d enjoy these:

http://ramirustom.blogspot.com
http://fallibleideas.com/
http://groups.google.com/group/beginning-of-infinity/subscribe
http://groups.google.com/group/taking-children-seriously/subscribe
http://groups.google.com/group/rational-politics-list/subscribe
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Autonomy-Respecting-Relationships/messages

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 November 2012 07:20 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 36 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  109
Joined  2012-09-22
Rami Rustom - 21 November 2012 07:07 AM
GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 07:00 AM

Okay then, lets talk about my results with AA. That is what I have the most experience with.

1.) Do you think that my recovery from Alcoholism can become more effective if I root out any taint of mysticism from it and boil the results down to its’ purely logical elements?

2.) Do you know of an alternative process, organization or body of existing knowledge that could have achieved the same or better results than I obtained through AA?

Or, do you just object on principle to the mysticism you observe as part of the AA Program

You are again lumping all the parts of AA into one thing. And then you’re saying that the one thing **must** have all the parts in order to work. Recall our last two posts:

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 07:00 AM

You also seems to believe that any degree of mysticism is just plain wrong (in any context) and that regardless of the reported beneficial results (by people like me) of AA,

To which I replied:
You said that your involvement in AA solved your problem. And now you’re saying that the mystical part of it *must* be there in order for it to have worked for you. How do you know that? How do you know that if you had done the AA, and AA didn’t have that mystical part, that it wouldn’t have worked for you?

The “Mystical” part seems to be a critical part of the successful formula. Why do I say that? It is a matter of survival of the fittest. There were/are no comparable/significant programs to AA that are in existence and that have flourished. Specificaly, there is no purely logical approach that has been promoted and had any significant record of success.


So, I don’t know if some program that doesn’t exist in any significant, publisized way, might have worked. Do you recommend then that I disavow the mystical part of AA and try to work a more purely logical AA program of my own device that “might work better”?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 November 2012 07:54 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 37 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  226
Joined  2012-09-10
GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 07:20 AM

You said that your involvement in AA solved your problem. And now you’re saying that the mystical part of it *must* be there in order for it to have worked for you. How do you know that? How do you know that if you had done the AA, and AA didn’t have that mystical part, that it wouldn’t have worked for you?

The “Mystical” part seems to be a critical part of the successful formula. Why do I say that? It is a matter of survival of the fittest.

I don’t know how “survival of the fittest” is an answer to why you think the mystical part is critical to AA. Explain?

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 07:20 AM

There were/are no comparable/significant programs to AA that are in existence and that have flourished. Specificaly, there is no purely logical approach that has been promoted and had any significant record of success.

I don’t understand why that matters.

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 07:20 AM

So, I don’t know if some program that doesn’t exist in any significant, publisized way, might have worked. Do you recommend then that I disavow the mystical part of AA and try to work a more purely logical AA program of my own device that “might work better”?

Thats up to you. But I don’t see how that would say anything about our discussion. You’ve already done the hard part of quitting.


You could drop the mystical part, and never go back to alcohol, and that wouldn’t falsify your theory nor mine. Or, after dropping the mystical part, you could go back to alcohol, and that wouldn’t falsify your theory nor mine.

 Signature 

—Rami Rustom

If you agree with my ideas, you’d enjoy these:

http://ramirustom.blogspot.com
http://fallibleideas.com/
http://groups.google.com/group/beginning-of-infinity/subscribe
http://groups.google.com/group/taking-children-seriously/subscribe
http://groups.google.com/group/rational-politics-list/subscribe
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Autonomy-Respecting-Relationships/messages

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 November 2012 08:02 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 38 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  109
Joined  2012-09-22

You don’t seem interested in, nor seem to care if the “Mystical” part of the AA program is a catalyst for synergystic effects or not.


In your “black & white” view, anything remotely connected to “magic” cannot be utilized, no matter how good the beneficial effects might be or if there is a down side to the good effects.


You seem to be more interested in logic than anything else. It seems for you that is all there is.

[ Edited: 21 November 2012 08:09 AM by GenerousGeorge]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 November 2012 08:13 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 39 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  226
Joined  2012-09-10
GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 08:02 AM

You don’t seem interested in, nor seem to care if the “Mystical” part of the AA program is a catalyst for synergystic effects or not.


In your “black & white” view, anything remotely connected to “magic” cannot be utilized, no matter how good the beneficial effects might be or if there is a down side.


You seem to be more interested in logic than anything else. It seems for you that is all there is.


I already gave you an explanation, which IIRC, you agreed to, which says that the mysticism part is a self-fulfilling prophecy. This explains how “it” works. So I’ve already answered your question and you agreed to my answer. If you disagree, then say that so we can continue our discussion.


If you agree, then I don’t understand why you think I’ve disagreed with you. (And BTW, I’ve already asked you this question and you didn’t answer. Why not? Do you think that this question is not relevant? If so, please explain why its not relevant to this discussion.)

 Signature 

—Rami Rustom

If you agree with my ideas, you’d enjoy these:

http://ramirustom.blogspot.com
http://fallibleideas.com/
http://groups.google.com/group/beginning-of-infinity/subscribe
http://groups.google.com/group/taking-children-seriously/subscribe
http://groups.google.com/group/rational-politics-list/subscribe
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Autonomy-Respecting-Relationships/messages

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 November 2012 03:27 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 40 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  109
Joined  2012-09-22
Rami Rustom - 21 November 2012 08:13 AM
GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 08:02 AM

You don’t seem interested in, nor seem to care if the “Mystical” part of the AA program is a catalyst for synergystic effects or not.


In your “black & white” view, anything remotely connected to “magic” cannot be utilized, no matter how good the beneficial effects might be or if there is a down side.


You seem to be more interested in logic than anything else. It seems for you that is all there is.


I already gave you an explanation, which IIRC, you agreed to, which says that the mysticism part is a self-fulfilling prophecy. This explains how “it” works. So I’ve already answered your question and you agreed to my answer. If you disagree, then say that so we can continue our discussion.


If you agree, then I don’t understand why you think I’ve disagreed with you. (And BTW, I’ve already asked you this question and you didn’t answer. Why not? Do you think that this question is not relevant? If so, please explain why its not relevant to this discussion.)

I don’t know if mysticism is a self fulfilling prophecy or not. It may be and If it is, that is an explanation acceptable to me, but not necessarily the whole answer.


Please answer my question ....  “You don’t seem interested in, nor seem to care if the “Mystical” part of the AA program is a catalyst for synergystic effects or not.”  Are you at all curious that the mystical (as you call it) effect might make the “logical” part of AA more effective than just the logic alone?


We don’t know what we don’t know. I’m not so sure that the brain just generates our thinking or if it may also be a communication or channeling device that in some ways makes the mystical part of AA have a synergystic effect on participants not wholly explained by our limited knowledge of how the brain and the “world” works.


Maybe I just like a little mystery and you don’t.  LOL

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 November 2012 03:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 41 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  226
Joined  2012-09-10
GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 03:27 PM

I don’t know if mysticism is a self fulfilling prophecy or not. It may be and If it is, that is an explanation acceptable to me, but not necessarily the whole answer.


Please answer my question ....  “You don’t seem interested in, nor seem to care if the “Mystical” part of the AA program is a catalyst for synergystic effects or not.”

I’ve already answered this. If a person believes that X will help him solve his problem, and then he does X, and because he ***believes*** that this works, then he solves his problem (i.e. self-fulfilling prophecy).


And I gave two examples that fit this description. One of them was the idea that there is such a thing as love at first sight. Someone who believes that this is possible, will experience it (hence self-fulfilling prophecy). And somebody who doesn’t believe it, won’t experience it.

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 03:27 PM

Are you at all curious that the mystical (as you call it) effect might make the “logical” part of AA more effective than just the logic alone?

You seem to be saying that “logic” is irrespective of the person applying it. Why? If you take any regular Joe, he doesn’t have sufficient knowledge to think well enough to solve his problems. So if this sort of person doesn’t believe that he’s able to solve his own problem (which is common for conventional people), and if believing in mysticism gets him to ***believe*** that he can solve his problem, then mysticism will help him while his reasoning will not (because he has poor reasoning ability from lack of knowledge).

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 03:27 PM

We don’t know what we don’t know. I’m not so sure that the brain just generates our thinking or if it may also be a communication or channeling device that in some ways makes the mystical part of AA have a synergystic effect on participants not wholly explained by our limited knowledge of how the brain and the “world” works.

Ah, finally we get some answers. Now I know why you believe this mystical thing. You think its possible for consciousness to arise from something other than a persons brain. That each person’s mind somehow taps into some other dimension or something. That is false.


Each person’s consciousness emerges from his brain. Instead of discussing this idea here, we already have a discussion going on about this topic:

http://www.samharris.org/forum/viewthread/15828/P150/#223193

 Signature 

—Rami Rustom

If you agree with my ideas, you’d enjoy these:

http://ramirustom.blogspot.com
http://fallibleideas.com/
http://groups.google.com/group/beginning-of-infinity/subscribe
http://groups.google.com/group/taking-children-seriously/subscribe
http://groups.google.com/group/rational-politics-list/subscribe
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Autonomy-Respecting-Relationships/messages

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 November 2012 05:35 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 42 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  226
Joined  2012-09-10
GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 03:27 PM

We don’t know what we don’t know. I’m not so sure that the brain just generates our thinking or if it may also be a communication or channeling device that in some ways makes the mystical part of AA have a synergystic effect on participants not wholly explained by our limited knowledge of how the brain and the “world” works.

Ah, finally we get some answers. Now I know why you believe this mystical thing. You think its possible for consciousness to arise from something other than a persons brain. That each person’s mind somehow taps into some other dimension or something. That is false.


Each person’s consciousness emerges from his brain. Instead of discussing this idea here, we already have a discussion going on about this topic:

http://www.samharris.org/forum/viewthread/15828/P150/#223193


To clarify, if consciousness involved tapping into something outside of the brain, and if the AA thing you’ve been describing involves this tapping into something outside of the brain thing, it would not be mysticism.


Mysticism means not corresponding with reality. So, if consciousness involved tapping into something outside of the brain, that something is physics—its reality—hence not mysticism.

 Signature 

—Rami Rustom

If you agree with my ideas, you’d enjoy these:

http://ramirustom.blogspot.com
http://fallibleideas.com/
http://groups.google.com/group/beginning-of-infinity/subscribe
http://groups.google.com/group/taking-children-seriously/subscribe
http://groups.google.com/group/rational-politics-list/subscribe
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Autonomy-Respecting-Relationships/messages

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 November 2012 07:01 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 43 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  109
Joined  2012-09-22
Rami Rustom - 21 November 2012 03:49 PM
GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 03:27 PM

I don’t know if mysticism is a self fulfilling prophecy or not. It may be and If it is, that is an explanation acceptable to me, but not necessarily the whole answer.


Please answer my question ....  “You don’t seem interested in, nor seem to care if the “Mystical” part of the AA program is a catalyst for synergystic effects or not.”

I’ve already answered this. If a person believes that X will help him solve his problem, and then he does X, and because he ***believes*** that this works, then he solves his problem (i.e. self-fulfilling prophecy).


And I gave two examples that fit this description. One of them was the idea that there is such a thing as love at first sight. Someone who believes that this is possible, will experience it (hence self-fulfilling prophecy). And somebody who doesn’t believe it, won’t experience it.

You also said ...... “He should also criticize that “solution”. And with sufficient understanding, he will discover that AA is mysticism. Its irrational”  Which makes me believe you are more concerned that they use proper logic than stop drinking. LOL

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 03:27 PM

Are you at all curious that the mystical (as you call it) effect might make the “logical” part of AA more effective than just the logic alone?

You seem to be saying that “logic” is irrespective of the person applying it. Why? If you take any regular Joe, he doesn’t have sufficient knowledge to think well enough to solve his problems. So if this sort of person doesn’t believe that he’s able to solve his own problem (which is common for conventional people), and if believing in mysticism gets him to ***believe*** that he can solve his problem, then mysticism will help him while his reasoning will not (because he has poor reasoning ability from lack of knowledge).

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 03:27 PM

We don’t know what we don’t know. I’m not so sure that the brain just generates our thinking or if it may also be a communication or channeling device that in some ways makes the mystical part of AA have a synergystic effect on participants not wholly explained by our limited knowledge of how the brain and the “world” works.

Ah, finally we get some answers. Now I know why you believe this mystical thing. You think its possible for consciousness to arise from something other than a persons brain. That each person’s mind somehow taps into some other dimension or something. That is false.

I am interested in the “mystical thing”  because it works in conjunction with the “logical thing” better than the “logical thing” alone. (In my experience) Where conciousness comes from is problematic. I don’t know and neither do you despite your “confident proclamations”.

Each person’s consciousness emerges from his brain. Instead of discussing this idea here, we already have a discussion going on about this topic:

I don’t want to discuss that as it is a “side issue”. What I am interested in (and you keep avoiding) is my observation that the mysticism element in combination with “logic” give synergystic results. In my observation much better than logic alone.

http://www.samharris.org/forum/viewthread/15828/P150/#223193

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 November 2012 05:06 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 44 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  226
Joined  2012-09-10
GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 07:01 PM

You also said ...... “He should also criticize that “solution”. And with sufficient understanding, he will discover that AA is mysticism. Its irrational”  Which makes me believe you are more concerned that they use proper logic than stop drinking. LOL

Thats ridiculous.

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 03:27 PM

Are you at all curious that the mystical (as you call it) effect might make the “logical” part of AA more effective than just the logic alone?

No. You’ve missed a point that I made earlier.


Solving one’s problem involves first believing that he’s able to solve it. Many people don’t believe they are able to solve their problems. So they go to religion and other forms of mysticism that tells them that they are able to solve their problems, or at least that something else will solve their problem. So this means beliving that one is able to solve his problems on faith—which means he doesn’t have **reasons** to believe that he can solve his problems.


The alternative approach is a rational one that involves reasoning. All problems are soluble. If you want to know the reasons for this, see _The Beginning of Infinity_.

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 03:27 PM

Ah, finally we get some answers. Now I know why you believe this mystical thing. You think its possible for consciousness to arise from something other than a persons brain. That each person’s mind somehow taps into some other dimension or something. That is false.

I am interested in the “mystical thing”  because it works in conjunction with the “logical thing” better than the “logical thing” alone. (In my experience) Where conciousness comes from is problematic. I don’t know and neither do you despite your “confident proclamations”.

What do you mean by “confident proclamations”?


I believe my ideas because I don’t have any criticisms of my beliefs. One of my beliefs is that if you take a computer running a software, and if you stop the hardware from working, the software will stop working too. And that software did not depend on anything besides the hardware. Our brains are hardware, and our minds are software.

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 03:27 PM

Each person’s consciousness emerges from his brain. Instead of discussing this idea here, we already have a discussion going on about this topic:

I don’t want to discuss that as it is a “side issue”. What I am interested in (and you keep avoiding) is my observation that the mysticism element in combination with “logic” give synergystic results. In my observation much better than logic alone.

I have not avoided that. I’ve answered you many times and you are confused by my answers and instead of asking me questions to clarify your confusion, you glaze over my answers as though I did not write them. Why do you do that?

 

 Signature 

—Rami Rustom

If you agree with my ideas, you’d enjoy these:

http://ramirustom.blogspot.com
http://fallibleideas.com/
http://groups.google.com/group/beginning-of-infinity/subscribe
http://groups.google.com/group/taking-children-seriously/subscribe
http://groups.google.com/group/rational-politics-list/subscribe
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Autonomy-Respecting-Relationships/messages

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 November 2012 03:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 45 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  109
Joined  2012-09-22

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 11:01 PM

You also said ...... “He should also criticize that “solution”. And with sufficient understanding, he will discover that AA is mysticism. Its irrational”  Which makes me believe you are more concerned that they use proper logic than stop drinking. LOL

Thats ridiculous.

GenerousGeorge - 21 November 2012 07:27 PM

Are you at all curious that the mystical (as you call it) effect might make the “logical” part of AA more effective than just the logic alone?

No. You’ve missed a point that I made earlier.


Solving one’s problem involves first believing that he’s able to solve it. Many people don’t believe they are able to solve their problems. So they go to religion and other forms of mysticism that tells them that they are able to solve their problems, or at least that something else will solve their problem. So this means beliving that one is able to solve his problems on faith—which means he doesn’t have **reasons** to believe that he can solve his problems.


The alternative approach is a rational one that involves reasoning. All problems are soluble. If you want to know the reasons for this, see _The Beginning of Infinity_.

The problem is one I cannot get you to acknowledge. In my experience the purely lgical approach does not work as well as the AA program.

 

Profile
 
 
   
3 of 3
3
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed