ROBOT BABIES

Yes, I had meant to put this in the last post, but it’s vital that you know this –

Watch out for mech-driving babies.

Reminds me of this one comic I read one time.

Advertisements

8 responses to “ROBOT BABIES

  1. its like choose your own adventure… SORT OF
    http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/

  2. jacksonskepticalsociety

    It’s like Choose Your Own Adventure Except Really Just Turn to Page 61 All the Other Choices Are Wrong.

    And then when you get to page 61, because you got to page 61, that’s the only place you could go, so therefore, you really wanted to go to page 61 all along.

    That may not be the best description. That website link comes up on google ads for atheist websites sometimes.

    Oh google ads.

  3. they shouldnt give away the ending in the title.

    logic is a byproduct of evilution. theres no evidence of logic existing outside of the brain. plus i like my reality the way it is just fine without any mystic mumbo jumbo. what does exist is neurology and what we construe as making sense of stimuli resulting in either a feeling of satisfaction or dissatisfaction. this is the sensory reward system that informs us of decisions that may be useful or inadequate for our survival.

    what we interpret as being advantageously reasonable didnt make the same amount of sense to our distant evolutionary ancestors, and the same for the ancestors before them. it was only after the necessary genetic mutation had distributed itself did we get some uniformity in what we term reason. intelligence and evolution go hand in hand as the evidence for that is abundant.

    of course this reasoning ability didnt distribute itself equally throughout the species. which is why you have cranks and crazies out there.

    so if were going to celebrate darwin, then we should celebrate his cousin francis galton, the huxleys, thomas malthus, etc.

    take galton for instance
    https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Francis_Galton

    inventor of forensic science, weather maps, psychometry, coined the idea of regression towards mediocrity (the mean) and the phrase “nature versus nurture”, and of course the eponymous whistle……… why did he do all this? to prove his theories on eugenics.

    the fact we can even chart climate change data, or take thumbprints, or gauge an intelligence quotient. yep. all thanks to eugenics.

    morality however, is a different issue altogether. we have vestigial primate troop-dwelling anxieties which influence levels of discomfort pertaining to certain actions or ideas. to make a long story short, it is whatever the supremacy deigns advantageous to the survival of the group. again, i refer you to nietzsche, here with the “will to power”
    https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Nietche#Will_to_power

    therefore logic doesnt exist. there are no absolutes, and sinner ministries is an aberration of nature for believing in a bearded magic man and his book of tall tales.

    where is your god now?

  4. the will to power is pertinent, as is this book
    https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Leviathan_%28book%29

    a must read.

    you cant have darwin without thomas hobbes. darwinism is essentially applied hobbesian thought.

  5. jacksonskepticalsociety

    “you cant have darwin without thomas hobbes. darwinism is essentially applied hobbesian thought.”

    Uh, maybe you could explain this, before I go on reading Leviathan again. I’ve read Origin and Leviathan before, but I’d like to know what, exactly, I’m looking for before I re-read the brick-like prose of T Hobbes.

  6. jacksonskepticalsociety

    Well I went and re-read a good chunk of Leviathan anyway.

    I can see how you could apply the “war of all v. all” consistently over long periods of time as a single type of selection pressure.

    Add a dash of Malthusian superfecundity to your war of all versus and all and you get one of the ideas of Darwin’s theory – the natural selection. It was Darwin who added variability and heredity to the mixture, which got us the original evolutionary theory.

    We’ve come a long way since. I recommend Gould’s The Structure of Evolutionary Theory to get the difference between the original Darwinian theory and what he calls the “neo-darwinian synthesis” in his typical grandiose style.

  7. jacksonskepticalsociety

    For some reason wordpress thought your comment on Nietzsche and Dalton was spam. Corrected that.

    I think your urge to justify eugenics is clouding your critical thinking circuits.

    Saying that Dalton worked statistics and meteorology to prove eugenics is the kind of argument I might expect from a creationist. It holds no water. How does one, for instance, even connect meteorology and genetics?

    Even saying that we wouldn’t have the weather forecast without Dalton is just as wrong as saying we wouldn’t have the forecast without eugenics.

    It’s like saying that a man who masturbates and makes maps of pollen samples only takes pollen samples because of his masturbation.

    Dalton was a polymath, and did not understand genetic principles. The studies of his time were extremely limited and even he himself knew that they proved little. You should not trust an expert when that expert is out of his field. A good modern example would be Francis Crick. You REALLY shouldn’t trust them when the entire field they are promoting has shown to be little more than political bunk.

    You are not thinking critically of your own statements, nor are you applying good evolutionary principles to your statements about evolution. No one has given good evidence for the heritability of intellectual capabilities. We can hardly measure intelligence in any way that would remotely qualify as “objective.” Nor has anyone found a genetic basis for gullibility. Gullibility is a natural human state that only practice and education can hold at bay, and certainly cannot eliminate. There was no spread of a “modern rationality” gene. If you think there was – [citation needed].

    You may be mistaking the Skeptics Society for the All Science is Always Right Society or something.

    If you want to talk about philosophy with scientists and skeptics this is the wrong place to do it. I’d suggest Rationally Speaking, where the head blogger is an actual philosopher. The link is over on the right.

    Then you have this sentence, which has a certain koan-like Zen quality I like.

    “therefore logic doesnt exist. there are no absolutes, and sinner ministries is an aberration of nature for believing in a bearded magic man and his book of tall tales.”

    It makes sense to me. This is not a glitch.

    Seriously, if you want to talk about all your eugenics plans and what the scientists “really think” you should do so on your own damn blog.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s