Buck Edwards

This is a relative question. You could end up doing bad things even if you started out with good intent. Nothing wrong with anything. Forgiveness can go a long way in collective healing.

This has absolutely nothing to do with the general rights of Trans people. It's about their recognition and not about making them feel better. It's about letting them not feel unaccepted or discriminated against in social settings.

But animals have emotions.

The best option is to be clean and honest about how you feel to avoid potential disruptions and misunderstanding.

They want the same dignity, worth and respect that's afforded to other general members of society. They don't want a differential treatment.

They cannot be turquoise at the same time.

Read a book on non violent communication.

This is interesting. Depends on how you define ego. Does the definition of ego constitute emotions? If yes, then animals have an ego as do all other sentient species. If the definition of ego is complete self awareness, this is still questionable since we cannot be fully assured if animals are self-aware.

Let's assume we're the most evolved form.

But that's a conditional statement. Not an absolution.

How can lack of bias be evil?

It would be wiser to not succumb to ideology. Low consciousness people are run by fear. If they were run by love they wouldn't need religion in the first place. The pre-rationalists bring ideas of post-rationalism (i.e. enlightenment ideals) down to their level, the pre-rationalists confuse post-rationalist ideas with religion and form a religion out of it, which is not what post-rationalism is. And post-rationalists also lump pre and post rationalism together because they both seem like spiritual non-tangible stuff, though they're different in actuality Haha, it wouldn't surprise me if Jesus really just wanted to enlighten people but had to use extreme metaphors just because of the time he lived in. And even with that they got him killed. Pure dude. Imagine he would've said stuff like "You are everything and nothing", "You are a field of undefinable awareness" etc. They would've killed him a lot earlier I'd guess.

Let's unpack and contradict my own statements posted earlier. r? "The exact relationship between consciousness and the brain is not known." True, but what is known, however, is that it's the electric activity in the brain that 'creates' the mind/consciousness. "But it's clear that the standard scientific model which says that consciousness is simply a collection of neurons is woefully inadequate." No scientists say this. They say that consciousness arises from the flow of energy in your 100 billion neural cells in your brain. Of course consciousness doesn't arise just from neurons alone, no, the neurons are 'merely' vessels for the energy that flows. Not only vessels, but the 100 billion neurons also create an extremely complex low-entropy structure. "Science has not been able to reconcile the ultimate question: what is the relationship between mind and matter?" It's true that we don't understand in details how the 100 billion neurons - and the energy constantly flowing between them (when you're alive that is) - creates the mind. But we do know - in simple terms - that this is what's going on. To believe anything else, like "the mind is something else than transfer of energy between matter" is being religious. Because we do for a fact know, that the consciousness is estabilshed from the transfer of electric energy between the 100 billion neurons in your brain. What is energy? Well, it's hard to describe what energy is, it can be many things. One way is to say that energy is something that is capable of making matter do work. Obviously energy, when controlled in an extremely complex low-entropy way, is also capable of creating consciousness. Now, 100 billion neruons, that's as many galaxies as there are in the entire Universe. It's hell of a lot. And these neurons are structured inside our brain in such an immensely, highly-ordered complex way, that it'll probably take 100s of years from now before we fully understand how it works. There are an estimated of 1000 synapses (that is connections between neurons) for each neuron in the brain. That gives an unbeliveable number of 100 trillion connections in the brain. Anyway, E=MC2, so in the deepest sense energy and matter is two sides of the same coin.

The reality is that we need much more scientific studies done on these kinds of questions by enlightened scientists -- which unfortunately are lacking at this point in human history. The exact relationship between consciousness and the brain is not known. But it's clear that the standard scientific model which says that consciousness is simply a collection of neurons is woefully inadequate. Science has not been able to reconcile the ultimate question: what is the relationship between mind and matter?

Hi, I've been wondering on what is your take on enlightenment, consciousness and the brain? I mean, from what I've read is that the main take on enlightenment is that there is only consciousness, and everything else is just an illusion inside consciousness, including ourselves. But is the human brain just a vessel to try and reach enlightenment, or is the human brain just an illusion altogether? Or is the human brain like a radio receiver which you can use to tap into consciousness? What if you have brain damage and say you're in vegetable state, and you are not able to think anymore, nor try to reach enlightenment? Doesn't a physical damage then deny you from your spiritual path? If everything is happening inside consciousness, the consciousness should be "stronger" than the physical damage. I know this sounds like my ego is coming up with all these questions resisting the enlightenment and it probably is just that.

There are parts of the brain which are active when people have self referential thoughts, thought about you, your position in relation to others, status and so on. I heard about a research somewhere that long time meditators have these regions more quite than normal people. As for mind body problem, I think it assumes that we have understanding of mind or body, but we don't. We have standard model here, other model there. Basically we don't know shit about reality.

You have apps in which you can make notes with handwriting. I think jotter.

I see tendencies of depression here. Mood fluctuations which are quite common in situations of a narcissistic parent. You have anger issues to work on. Maybe punch a pillow next time you get violent thoughts.

That was a thorough explanation. It's exemplary that just a few sentences was all that was needed to decode the entire context.

Here's news. Twitter replaces blue bird logo with doge meme. And we've officially entered the Apocalypse.

Wouldn't it be extreme to say that people would be ostracized for it?

Autism is often the inability to understand social cues and social dynamics. With narcissism, there's a deliberate attempt to put oneself on the pedestal to get a higher reward. Autism can cause an individual to sometimes say mindless things yet it's not a deliberate attempt and is often mixed up with narcissism.

I could've never been more eloquent than you.

Indirectly it is. It's a form of a push. It's positive when the person is being supported in their efforts, when they're pushed to achieve what they think is desirable and negative motivation when they're being disciplined, reprimanded so that they feel stressed enough to actually do something about the problem. Whether or not if any of these systems are going to be fully effective depends entirely on the way it's perceived and received by the person receiving the motivation.