|
|
Post by EricOlivares on May 19, 2015 9:49:01 GMT
Video Test #9 97ddddd
1. Question: Provide a critical review of Sam Harris' viewpoint. Do you agree or disagree? Explain your answer.
In Sam Harris speech he argues that morality or moral question can be answered by science and why he believes this is that morality or moral question have factual answers and people do not see this thus making them think moral questions and science are two different subjects entirely which Harris believe to be very untrue. he also believes that people need to start seeing that moral questions have right and wrong answers and people need to see this to become a greater community.
After thinking for awhile about his statement I agree with his statement because he does raise good points during his speech for example when Harris talks about the food pyramid this reflecs his speech because we as people know what foods are bad for us and what foods are good for us but majority of people choose to eat the food that is bad for us because it tasted better than the food that is good for us. another point that coincides with Harris' speech is racism most people in the world would saw racism is immoral and unjust but their are some people that think it is right and they are not to blame for their ignorance because nobody is born racist those values and ideas are taught and instilled in them at a very young age by either their parents or the community that they are surrounded in because if someone grew up in a place where something that everybody knew to be wrong was taught to be right in that certain place they would be totally be oblivious to that thing being wrong because they were raised that way. so to put in the way that I interpret Harris' lecture is that moral values have right and wrong answers just like science even know we growing believing in certain values to be right the truth is not all moral values that people believe in are right.
|
|
|
|
Post by Julian Rodriguez on May 20, 2015 1:41:39 GMT
Julian Rodriguez
David Lane; PHIL8
Film Exam Week 7 - 97ddd
1. The strongest argument for the universe being a computational simulation is, as made by Professor Lane in Is the Universe an App? that, "consciousness is a virtual simulator apparently evolved over eons of time to enable mammals with a higher brain function to in source various options of how to respond to a disparate array of problems before outsourcing them." Reality at best is the neurological activity in the brain that allows us to respond accordingly to the outside world, a system of codes and patterns which we perceive and respond to, while at worst can be misleading and artificial. As explained in Is the Universe an App? our minds construct virtual realities for us, or virtual simulation, which we have little choice but to accept and take for granted to be, in fact, real. It is in this sense then, through coding and simulation, the universe may be a computational simulation as perceived by the human mind.
2. I would argue that people read fewer books today than ever before as a result of the prevalence of technology, the internet, and the easily accessible and vast amounts of information that is made possible to us in our modern world. It appears some people are more inclined to activities that require the least amount of effort and energy while at the same time produce the greatest yield. When it comes to information and how it can be obtained, between books and other avenues of delivering the information, it makes more sense to use the internet and its prerequisite mode of technology rather than read books because it can produce more precise results at a far greater rate. Bottom line, nowadays, is that there are far more efficient modes of acquiring information that can be utilized with far greater ease than by using the archaic mode of books.
|
|
|
|
Post by Julian Rodriguez on May 21, 2015 20:30:27 GMT
Julian Rodriguez
David Lane: PHIL8 Critical Thinking
5/20/15
97dddef
Week 8 Film Exam
1. Quantum mechanics and its implication are in no way subjects I am an expert of, nor do I have vast knowledge about. However, after watching the video Quantum Superposition, and to some degree before watching the video, really, my lack of understanding of quantum mechanics became largely apparent. Its complexities and implications with space and time, as we know it, and as explained in the film, allow two particles to exist at two different times and places at once. This might tell us that life can exist at two different places or times, or dimensions--possibly more. What it tells us about the evolution of life, however, is perhaps that it has limits, similar to time, as proven through Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. More literally, it tells me that there is a whole lot of stuff in physics, and so much complexity, that I have yet to understand much of what has been discovered. This complexity is demonstrated in the film, The Magical Leaf: The Quantum Mechanics of Photosynthesis, as the many principles, concepts, and requirements of the evolutionary process are discussed. In the film, it is stated that the process of photosynthesis as an evolutionary achievement has been a matter of trial and error, and concludes by arguing we can harness the same mechanics used by photosynthesis to assist with the progress of evolving human life.
2. According to David Lane in his video, The Kirpal Statistic: How Visions are Self-Projected, the Kirpal statistic is the, "the probable outcome that the majority of meditators, provided the necessary instructions in [...] yoga practice, will hear and see something." Lane argues that one does not necessarily need to be a master or enlightened guru to achieve inner perception and sensation from meditation, and that actually, the likelihood that someone will achieve something of noticeable significance or that this will occur is but a matter of time. This argument is enough to make one want to meditate, especially if they never have before. The greatest point made by this argument, therefore, is that anyone can do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Julian Rodriguez on May 21, 2015 22:17:43 GMT
Julian Rodriguez
David Lane: PHIL 8
5/21/15
97ddddd
Week 9 Film Exam
1. In Sam Harris' presentation, The Moral Landscape, at the Long Beach TED Talk in 2010, he argues that there is no distinction between morality and science in the sense, as I have perceived, that science is logical, and to be moral is to be logical. Harris points out that some would lead us to believe that we, as humans, are all very different and that it is this difference that does not allow for a shared concept of moral values among us. For example, under these conditions that we are all different, Islamic morality might be different than Catholic values, or Agnostic values, or Hindu, and so forth. But in actuality, as Harris argues, moral values are, or should, be similarly shared by all humans, in what he calls a continuum of facts. The differentiation, or division, in moral landscape among different groups of people in this day in age, he claims, is quite dangerous. Moral values can be shared in the sense that morality can be boiled down to, as Harris claims, "a concern about conscious experience," and that there are "truths to be known about how human communities flourish, whether or not we understand these truths, and morality relates to these truths." Here it is to be noted the consciousness and truths referred to are shared by all human beings alike, regardless of religion, culture, or race. Therefore, moral values can be shared across the board by all people, and as Harris argues, there is no better time than now to come to this realization for the betterment of the human species. Perhaps my favorite part of the talk is when he considers the concept that all people should be able to wear whatever they want voluntarily, without regard or fear of the consequences made prelevant by the specific culture they find themselves in, like the women who are influenced to wear Burkas. His best argument, I found, was that there are balances between extremes that constitute morality, and that it in this sense of virtue, similar to Aristotle's view of virtue being balance and moderation, all people can find balance and a shared, logical moral landscape.
|
|
|
|
Post by Julian Rodriguez on May 21, 2015 23:02:31 GMT
Julian Rodriguez
David Lane: PHIL 8
5/21/15
8763
Week 10 Film Exam: On Improbable Events
As discussed at his TED talk, Professor Brian Greene mentions the probability of their being a multiverse, which, even he admits, sounds strange to people when we have been commonly raised to understand the concept of their only being a universe, or that everything belongs to one single shared space. However, as strange is this might sound, the existence of a multiverse is possibly provable--making it probable that it might occur. At first glance, someone who has no experience in the fields of astronomy or physics might regard this as improbable, which is far more logical than claiming it as impossible. This makes one reflect on our own lives, whether day-to-day or on a larger scale, possibly that considering the entirety of our lives, that there are many things that seem improbable, but by definition, could quite possibly happen. Because there is so much complexity and room for almost anything to occur in the universe, or probable multiverse, the question is begged that couldn't anything in our day-to-day lives, no matter how improbable it may seem? If there is such room for question in such fundamental matters as space, time, and physics, it seems to me that anything that can happen, will happen--it just might not be observable or known to you in that current situation. With so much to question about the universe, or possible multiverse, and how it works, it makes day-to-day probabilities seem entirely and utterly small. Though for years, as mentioned by Greene in his talk, it was believed that there is only one universe, there may come a time when it is common knowledge that there are in fact multiple universes. Therefore, these things, though extremely vast and complex, can be probable, though they may seem improbable. By definition, though something may be improbable, it does not mean it can't happen--so there is hope my friends!
|
|
niko
New Member
Posts: 11 
|
Post by niko on May 25, 2015 4:53:59 GMT
Code:8763
Greene throughout his TED talk brings up the probability of a multiple universes aka the multiverse. He acknowledges that to an outside spectator who has perhaps only the rudimentary knowledge of physics and astronomy, the concept of a multiverse seems impossible. This concept however strongly held up by string theory and has the mathematics behind it. Indeed, in his speech Greene acknowledges that the only reason we are able to question various scientific processes and abnormalities is the result of our universe being able to sustain our type of life out of an ad infinitum of other possible realities; if it did not, we would not be here to question them. In many ways Greene believes we have been asking the “wrong” questions. Instead of trying to find out the exact purpose or why something seems “special”, we need to find out why such a thing occurs in the first place and the significance it leads to or lends itself to. In other words instead of looking at the “beam of light” or even along it we must look at the hole in the roof that allows for the light to pass into the room. This concept and reasoning can leak into our day to day lives because mathematically our very existence is by all means “impossible” when compared to the oblivion of infinity that is the multiverse: which combines every possible and unknown variable over and over again. If this is the case why should any event ever be deemed improbable in our day to day lives?
|
|
|
|
Post by asdfjaiilee on May 25, 2015 5:01:21 GMT
Film Test 9
code: 8763
Brian Greene's idea of the multiverse and how it could be the very solution to the age-old question of why our universe appears to be fine-tuned for life reminds me very much of the first book we read in this class, We Are Probability. Brian Greene argues that our universe may not actually encompass everything in existence, like many believe, but rather is just one of innumerable universes spread out across a vast plane of space and void. Brian Greene draws attention to a very peculiarly small number that is supposedly the measurement of dark energy in our universe. He explains that this number explains the earth's capacity to host life measured by the amount of dark energy in the universe in the same way that the earth's distance from the sun explains why the earth is the only planet in our solar system to support life - through physical features of the universe (and planet) that make conditions fit for life to flourish. What Brian Greene is hinting at is that perhaps we do not exist in a universe that is bending towards human will and prosperity, but rather we exist probabilistically in one of many universes just because this particular one can support our way of life. It may appear that the universe and the planet may be fine-tuned for life, but in an enormous amount of different systems, it is likely that some may in fact to viable for life. Through this idea, it might be more probable to speculate that perhaps the all-encompassing "universe" is not fine-tuned for life, but rather our form of life is fine-tuned to this specific universe out of many.
All of these ideas go back to the first idea that we learned in this class, that in extremely large numbers, extraordinary things can happen. Probability explains how we exist in one of many universes, how we ended up in the Milky Way Galaxy and also how we ended up on this specific floating piece of rock orbiting this specific star in this specific solar system.
Improbable events may happen in our day-to-day lives, but using Brian Greene's way of thought, we can explain to ourselves rationally that with so many events happening, there is bound to be a few improbable ones.
|
|
|
|
Post by asdfjaiilee on May 25, 2015 5:08:55 GMT
nikoI really liked the analogy that you made with the beam of light and the hole in the roof. I agree with your thoughts on Brian Greene's idea of "asking the right questions". The general concept that I and I'm sure many others have gathered through Brian Greene's TEDTalk is that our universe has the capacity to hold life because of its physical conditions and that the chances of our existence is so infinitesimally small compared to the vastness of blackness and multiverses that anything that may seem improbably in our day-to-day lives may in fact be not that improbable at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by vgamboamejia on May 26, 2015 0:14:29 GMT
97dddef
Why is understanding quantum mechanics and its implications important for understanding how life evolves?
Because we then understand how life is essentially random. Everything that happens is a probability of it happening, nothing is certain just as the way animals evolve, we do not know how they will evolve until it happens. Therefore understanding quantum mechanics, allows us to see the possibility of two things being one at the same time. Just as the example of how Einstein and Newton being in the same room, Einstein entered the room to see the equation written by Newton, and as he was replying, Newton entered the room to write down the equation. Which shows that the coexisted at the same time and the same place but it not at the same time just the same.
2. What is the Kirpal Statistic?
Is that meditators will here or experience something during meditation, which occurs when given the proper instructions. The experience that people have are like but not limited to hearing sounds and seeing bright white lights and seeing images of people.
|
|
|
|
Post by vgamboamejia on May 26, 2015 0:15:00 GMT
97ddddd
Question: Provide a critical review of Sam Harris' viewpoint. Do you agree or disagree? Explain your answer.
Sam Harris argues for morality and he believes that moral questions can be answered by science, however people do not see this as related therefore this makes science and morals different. However he believes that once people realize that moral questions have right and wrong answer we will then be able to live in a greater community. Which is something that I do agree with because, as we have entered the 21st century, we now have answers we never would have hoped for 50 years ago, vaccines, advanced technology, create human organs from 3D printing. Having all of this and we still separate morality from science, combining the two would allow us to just as Harris argues a greater community, because we can then realize that not of the moral standing we have, such as caring more for an ape than an ant, or even as professor Lane makes the neurological argument of vegetarianism, in which he believes that we will be less prone to eat animals that contain a central nervous system which allows them to replicate similar characteristic to us humans, however we still eat animals that contain a central nervous system but cannot understand replicate anything to us.
|
|
|
|
Post by vgamboamejia on May 26, 2015 1:18:13 GMT
8763
Question: How can the reasoning that Professor Greene demonstrates throughout his lecture help us to think more realistically about "improbable" events in our own day to day lives?
I believe the way that Greene helps us think more of our day to day lives to understand that the improbable are just as likely to occur because our existence is just an improbable event. We exist not because of some designed destined creation but we were just as Professor Lane described probability. We by a simple probability had an earth to live in and there is nothing more than that which is responsible for our creation, in evolution it was a probability that we turned into Homo sapiens and anything that follows after that. Even the creation of penicillin, which has save hundreds of lives since its creation, however it was only created by accident. Which demonstrates the reasoning Greene which like is improbable and that should be what we expect.
|
|
|
|
Post by damariselenes on May 26, 2015 2:15:32 GMT
Test 4
Code: 0922
1. Have you ever had a paranormal experience? Or, do you know of someone who claims to have had one? How would you explain it rationally? Does the Chandian Effect apply?
• One of multiple paranormal experiences I have had since I was a child till the last occurrence a couple months back followed me. Ever since I was about 5 years old I would always see a lady in a long white gown walking inside and outside of my house. I was never afraid of her because of how frequently I would see her as a child from watching me as I played to just walking around my home. Although as I got older I began to almost ignore her as she faded in my memories. I had almost forgotten about this lady up until 4 years ago when I moved to Riverside from Ontario where I had lived my whole life. About a month after the move once we were all settled in I was eating at my kitchen table facing a large window with see through curtains that only allowed people to look out the window but not in through the window. As I am eating I look up and I see this lady in a white gown walking as she stops to turn to look at me and smile warm-heartedly. All the memories of this lady then flooded my mind and I immediately ask my mother when was the last time I had mentioned her, it had been almost 7 years since then. About 3 weeks after I return to what is now my fathers house in Ontario where I first encountered this lady when she reappears to me there as well. I have only seen this lady while I am at home whether it be at my fathers house or mothers. I think I could explain this as something that is more of an innocent child making up an imaginary friend that would watch over her as she played because during the time that she had disappeared was a time that I was not going through much in my life. I believe that this lady in a white gown was a product of my imagination and my mind brings her back up in rough times to remind me that even when I think I’m alone I’ll never truly be alone.
2. Think of your own astrological sign and find a horoscope that pertains to you. Does it fit? How would a critical thinker explain it?
• I do not normally believe in horoscopes although after seeing mine right before I answered this question it amazed me on how accurate it indirectly explained what is going on in my life. O have read that horoscopes can be accurate but only up to a certain degree. This more than likely has to do with the fact that horoscopes are not directly related to a single person but to all people forcing the horoscope to be over generalized up to a certain degree to where it can either make or break the prediction. I noticed that every horoscope has a problem along with a solution to the problem, if not it says something to help the person be leaded into doing something about the problem or situation.
3. If an intelligent alien did indeed visit this planet and came over to your house, what do you think he would find most odd about human behavior?
• I believe that the most odd human behavior that aliens would encounter would have to be the reaction of a human’s first face to face contact with an alien. The reason for this is that when a human first sees an alien they would not know what to do. So many thoughts could run through a person’s mind it is almost unpredictable what we would do initially because at one point we never thought we would actually come into contact with an alien. Another behavior that I think would be odd is the overall reaction of the world to the visit from these aliens, like said before we do not know for sure what each and everyone of us will do, for all we know we can end the human race by killing one another off.
|
|
|
|
Post by damariselenes on May 26, 2015 2:16:26 GMT
Test 5
Code: 97654
1. Explain the neuroethical argument for vegetarianism. Do you agree or disagree with it? Be sure to support your answer.
• The neuroethical argument for vegetarianism is the idea that we should not eat other animals because it is unethical given that they are living beings on this earth just like ourselves. Many of these animals demonstrate great intelligence and have had tests ran on them proving that they have a nervous system similar to ours, which means they can most definitely feel pain. Because they can feel pain animals dserve the right to live and for us to show empathy for them. I agree with the argument although I am not a vegetarian because no being should have to suffer considering that we have all means to be nourished and fed with other forms of food.
2. What is the remainder conjecture? Give an example of how it works.
• The remainder conjecture states that when something extraordinary occurs before we assume and give our very first response or reaction as to what it was or what we saw, we should first try to explain it through a logical way of thinking rather than letting our minds answer our questions with what we want to hear. After attempting to answer the question logically and if it still cannot be reasonably explained after all effort was made to explain it, then it would be considered a remainder. For example, there are many physical wonders around the world like the creation of the pyramids that science can’t reasonably explain, and therefore many people resort to the remainder that there are outer beings in the universe.
3. If there is a genetic connection between us and a grain of wild rice, how should such information influence or impact our worldview?
• This connection should influence or impact our worldview by helping us realize that we are all connected and intertwined with everything around us and across the globe. With this being said I believe that no human should think that they are better than or more important than any other component that makes up this world because we are all a part of the same circle of life: as mufasa said in the lion king, “when we die, our bodies become the grass, and the antelope eat the grass. And so we are all connected in the great circle of life.”
|
|
|
|
Post by dmartinez169 on May 29, 2015 22:40:28 GMT
Test #8
Code:91ddddd
Question: Provide a critical review of Sam Harris' viewpoint. Do you agree or disagree? Explain your answer.
In the video Sam Harris he argues about mortality and as an answer to his argument he believes science can explain it. Human beings are not able to draw the connection between science and morals yet, since they cannot comprehend the connection they do not related them as one. He believes that once we are able to understand that there are two sizes of the moral that the point of views of society would change, opening an opportunity for a better living environment. To this argument I agree, because as Professor Lane said the generation right now is way smarter than 40 years ago. If they were to tell past generations the technology we have now they would of never believed it. We have advanced in medication, technology and much more now imagine if we were to combine it with Harris argument, how would our world be.. much better I believe. Moral values can be shared right now, if we were to passed them along we would be able to live in a much peaceful world.
|
|
|
|
Post by dmartinez169 on May 31, 2015 21:51:35 GMT
Test # 10
Code: 8763
How can the reasoning that Professor Greene demonstrates throughout his lecture help us think more realistic about “improbable” in our own day to day lives?
In the video Professor Greene speaks about certain question we may be able to answer and some of that we just can’t as well as knowledge that we may obtain and knowledge that we won’t, however is kind of impossible to know exactly what would really happen. If we think about all the different events that happen within our own life we might think why only me, however there are more improbable events happening in our universe alone. All of this makes me go back to the beginning of the semester when we learned that in extremely large numbers, extraordinary things can happen. Out of the people that we are in this universe of course some of the events are going to appear improbable. Improbable events happen left and right in our daily life, however thinking back to what we first learn in this class, probability and now Greene’s ideas we can always find an answer to those improbable events.
|
|
