> This is a naive world view. Religion became a tool for the powerful to suppress the masses. I doubt it was ever "for the good of the tribal man", although it's a nice story.
It is hardly a naive world view. It is instead grounded in reality and the evolutionary luggage of humans and its various consequences on our cultures.
We all probably agree, but there seems to be a misunderstanding of the grand parent's comment.
Namely, you stated that "Religion became a tool ...", but what GP is referring to is "before it became such tool, what was it ?"
> "I doubt it was ever "for the good of the tribal man", although it's a nice story."
I think both GP and I will agree. It is not "for the good of the tribal man", at the same time it does not imply the other alternative that you seem to suggest: "for the benefit of the ruler class".
For example, the selfish gene theory offers a compelling explanation that will not only fit both perspective ("good for tribal man / tribe", "good for ruler"), but also provide insight to similar cultural aspects such as religion, patriotism, to only cite a few.
Namely, genes influence their containers, i.e. "survival machines" (SV) in their environment, and natural selection favors genes that induce behaviors leading to increasing the number of copies of said genes in the population.
Compared to other animals, humans evolved a complex social dimension as part of their behavior.
Among the various "humans" populations (probably even more distant ancestors), the genes that led to the heuristic behavior of "follow the elders / leaders of the tribe" happen to grant a differential survival advantage to its carriers: indeed, the elder is an "elder" in virtue of having living long, and more generally, a "leader" is such in virtue of having lived long enough and gathered large social and "financial" capital. So "follow the elders / leaders of the tribe" is a useful rule for you to survive. Over time, the gene becomes spread through the general population.
Due to the inability of our ancestors to properly establish causal relationship, while passing "useful rules for survival of the group" , they also happened to pass a lot of superstition and irrational principles, namely because they failed at establishing causal relationship ("is the crop yield bad because I looked wrong at the sun god statue ?" and so on).
Those rules are "simple", easy to follow for the tribal man, and to make matters worse, his genes have likely conditioned him to follow those rules (mostly) unquestioned anyway.
Whether we like it or not, the rule of "behave well now for a better life after death" was useful at the time, at a surface level for both the "tribal man" but also his "powerful people / leader", and at a deeper level for their shared genes.
Like many other "heuristics" for decision-making that humanity has carried over, it is not immune from exploitation from "more selfish", "mutant" actor: snake oils salesman, politicians promising easy solution to what are actually difficult problems.
Religion might have at some point been useful for the good of the tribal man, and incidentally his tribe leaders, which only reinforced the pattern, but the evolutionary blueprints these religion rides on now get exploited by what we nowadays call "powerful people", as you say:
> But powerful people(like Peter Thiel) have throughout history enforced their own fucked up world views on the rest of us, via indoctrination and blunt force. It's still ongoing.
> People are wired to follow their leaders.
But it is not just a matter of indoctrination and blunt force, it is unfortunately a matter of predisposition of the human mind.
But the leaders have not "wired" them, they are just plugging into already existing circuits, and channeling their current to enact their desired outcomes (however perverted they may be).
To leave on a optimistic note, by a chain of serendipitous events, despite religions dominating not so long ago, secularism has somehow emerged and helped us separate the wheat from the chaff in many aspects of our lives.
As humans, we already have come a long way in untangling our messy evolutionary baggage and the various side effect of natural selection of genes and their extended behaviors (religion, culture, etc...)
Just as how we have to upset the genes' goals through methods such as contraception, there is no reason why we couldn't free ourselves from their other machinations.
> I believe most people have an innate spiritual side, questioning our roles in the universe and what life is really all about.
I think this statement suggest a confusion / mix-match of philosophical, moral and ethical questions that are still grounded in the material world, and "spiritual" that are by most common definitions pertaining to super natural assumption (intangible human soul never measured so far).
If anything, deeper examination suggests that religion hardly helps much when it comes to those grand questions either.
Most people probably have the capacity to question the "why" and other such questions, but not all necessarily them have the luxury of exercising it.
Technology, methods and people at the time are bound to have been different, even if only slightly so.
Throughout history, many things were thought of as wasteful and looked over, until some people serendipitously spent time and energy and found some diamond in the dirt.
It depends, but in general, it is expected be on the lower end.
The principal task of a "research science manager" is not to "do" the research, but foster an environment that will help other researcher that are actually focused into looking in / for the "dirt" (by dirt I assume you mean the nitty-gritty details of unraveling research problems).
This would be setting high level direction, advising on approach to research problems, as well as the general "bureaucracy" and logistics required to make the team running.
If time allows, a research science manager can still explore some research topics on his own as a research, but that becomes more of an side quest than actual main quest. Of course, they can still yield interesting result.
Finally, a research science manager should not just work in a top down fashion, but also incorporate bottom up feedback, i.e. adapt the overall research team's direction based on the "dirt" that is brought up to him by the dedicated researchers.
An "ad-hominem" attack would be an attack on Mr. Howard "as a person" in order to invalidate his argument. For example: "Terrence Howard is a bad movie actor therefore his scientific ideas are wrong." (I think he's a good actor actually!)
He certainly is an interesting character. As a rough barometer, anyone who goes on Joe Rogan to present their hidden scientific truth of the universe while making an unsubstantiated claim to have "95 patents" is probably worthy of a few giggles. For a full debunking, read on...
Taking his claim "1 times 1 equals more than 1" for example, Mr. Howard may very well be perceiving non-Euclidean space that the rest of us are missing entirely. Certainly if we change the axioms of mathematics then we can jury-rig this claim to be true, but at that point the claim becomes non-falsifiable, and not particularly useful.
Similarly, the claim that "every element in the periodic table has a musical key, and that H, C, Si, Co, Rh are all in the key of E at different octaves", the "octave" seems to be an analog of the periodic table "row" (how many electron shells the atom has), and the "key" seems to be roughly-speaking the relative "column" (relative electronegativity of the valence shell) with E apparently being a "half-full" valence shell. So if we take the "weak claim" that "musical tones are a nice labelling scheme for the elements", it doesn't contribute any new secret knowledge that isn't already well-understood by mainstream chemistry and represented in the standard Periodic Table. On the other hand, if we go with the "strong claim" that elements actually have musical tones, certainly there is no evidence of this in terms of atomic vibrations, photon emission/absorption spectra, etc. More likely Mr. Howard has some form of synesthesia--but again, just because one insists that "the number 4 is green", or that "the month of August tastes like tomatoes" does not make it so.
TBH I think he just confused the freq emited by the Hydrogen Line with the idea that every element has it's own frequency. Which you could actually calculate but is not something analog to the material but also to the conditions it is in.
Now when he speaks of tones in terms of frequencies he isn't crazy at all. You could find out the tone of say the Hydrogen Line by diving it until you are capable of finding out which tone it could match (if you could) - it's funny cause I was kind of thinking of this discovering electromagnetic astronomy when this video came out
Now I had some fun laughing of the b* he could throw, but I'm not entirely sure everybody is as smart at they think they are when they make fun of him.
Russell may have indeed derived the concept of "tone" from absorption spectral lines which were known since the 1800's, however, there are many obvious logical gaps/flaws, e.g.:
- There are multiple absorption lines per element--sometimes more than 100--not a single line one could call the "tone".
- The lines don't follow any periodicity/doubling/harmonic rule, nor do they regularly ascend/descend in frequency as atomic number increases.
- The lines are light-range THz (nm) rather than acoustic-range Hz. (Howard said explicitly "Hydrogen is 41.5 Hz" but Russell seems to use relative Do-Re-Mi scale rather than a numeric Hz value.)
Howard's/Russell's "tone" seems to be a more New Age-y "intrinsic vibration of matter" which is not actually measurable with any existing instrument. It may have been inspired by the concept of "wave-particle duality" considering that Russell's book was published the same year Schrödinger was working out his wave equations. But more likely, it is a continuation of a much older human tendency to use music and "perfect harmonics" to describe the observed physical world, dating back to Pythagoras' cosmology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musica_universalis.
If you actually read Russell's work, there are some major "shoe-horning" problems--he invents lots of imaginary elements around Hydrogen and Helium in order to create 8-tone octaves for each, such as "Alphanon", "Hydron", "Luminon", and "Carbogen". For rows 2 and 3, he then runs into the problem that the row has 8 elements (valence shell has 8-electrons), but there are only 7 unique solfeggio notes per octave (do, re, mi, fa, so, la, ti)--his solution is to not assign solfeggio notes to the noble gases at all, so for example Sodium is "do" and Chlorine is "ti", while Neon and Argon are... nothing. In rows 4+ he subdivides his "mi"s and "so"s. It is pretty clear that had Mendeleev not first invented the Periodic Table, Russell wouldn't have had his musical epiphany.
Just curious, but was it an US prison ?
I have trouble seeing them allowing the prisoners to play game.
Also, how are the prisoners supposed to make money to pay for the game ?
There are paid jobs in the prison for the inmates. They are not very good, but it's a thing. You can also send funds to an inmate's commissary account, if somebody you care about is in there.
While I understand the sentiment, I think we might not necessarily need more people in the world, but enable more people who already came to life to live up to their potential.
Too much human potential is wasted in under developed regions.
> Too much human potential is wasted in under developed regions.
Too much human potential is wasted in highly developed regions as well, but it's not a question of access to resources, it's a question of living in a dysfunctional society driven by a lot of things that aren't "hey, how do we make the world better?"
Ark Survival Evolved ?
Base game should be around 135GB, and you don't have to install all the different maps at the same time since you won't be switching between them frequently.
If you want to run a dedicated server on top of that, those are around 25GB per map, so it is not that crazy I think.
No idea. I am just reporting what I saw when I clicked "install" for her. I'm not into survival games so I don't play it, I just know I was stunned at the requirement and that she had to remove other games to fit it on her PC's SSD.
This reminded me of a Dr House episode where the patient somehow ingested tape worm eggs, which managed to make their way into the brain, thigh muscle etc... through blood, then hatch there.
Looks like it is referred to as Neurocysticercosis [0].
The parasite does not necessarily chose where it might end up, so it is up to luck.
The victim probably ingest a bunch of eggs, which will find their way into different parts of the body, with different level of survivability.
The brain does look like a cosy place to survive.
"Louise basically dismissing the entire thing with "You dont get to bully people' Without even reading the comments."
> This is either a troll, or a very dishonest take ? Rossmann literally reads his messages in the video, as well as his own answers, and explain his rationale for distancing himself from the project.
Yes, he is "scared", because Micay comes out of the blue to accuse him of supporting "murder attempts" against his person, and to "publicly expose Louis" for all the wrong he has allegedly done to him (Micay).
At the cost of using a very simplistic analogy, if the cook at the restaurant I eat daily keeps threatening retribution for unfounded reason, I will make sure to not only stop eating there, but make others know the situation in case something happens to me.
reply