Cooking?

[punshhh]

Can you tell me history of development of intellect ( I think it is development of concious mind).

I can't go into detail as I am not an anthropologist. There is a hypothetical point of time when a human ancestor, or a group or culture at the time, first began to modify its behavior by exercising its new found intellect to analyze intellectually its circumstances.

I would agree that it occurred alongside the development of self consciousness.

 

[dafydd]

I can't go into detail as I am not an anthropologist. There is a hypothetical point of time when a human ancestor, or a group or culture at the time, first began to modify its behavior by exercising its new found intellect to analyze intellectually its circumstances.

I would agree that it occurred alongside the development of self consciousness.

How extremely informative and blindingly obvious. Here's a good idea, if somebody is interested in this subject then why not go to a library and find some books instead of asking for one line answers here.

 

[Kumar]

How extremely informative and blindingly obvious. Here's a good idea, if somebody is interested in this subject then why not go to a library and find some books instead of asking for one line answers here.

Because this is a part of discussion.

 

[Kumar]

I can't go into detail as I am not an anthropologist. There is a hypothetical point of time when a human ancestor, or a group or culture at the time, first began to modify its behavior by exercising its new found intellect to analyze intellectually its circumstances.

I would agree that it occurred alongside the development of self consciousness.

Thanks. It will be quite intresting.

 

[dafydd]

Because this is a part of discussion.

You are expecting a post that explains the history of the intellectual development of mankind? Ok, we got smarter. Happy?

 

[dafydd]

Thanks. It will be quite intresting.

What will be interesting? He didn't say that he was going to expound on the intellectual development of mankind.

 

[punshhh]

Thanks. It will be quite intresting.

Well as I see it when humanity developed intellect they tended to ignore their previous instinctual and conditioned behaviors, which enabled them to persist within an evolutionary niche, as primates.

This intellect confused them and was a kind of madness, resulting in all sorts of behaviors which drew them out of their niche and into conflict with other organisms in the ecosystem.

A beneficial side effect of this development was the development of intelligent strategies. Which gave them a remarkable advantage over their competitors and enabled them to spread and adapt rapidly to environmental scenarios.

The rest is history and it is commonly understood that this history is in a sense unnatural.

 

[dafydd]

Well as I see it when humanity developed intellect they tended to ignore their previous instinctual and conditioned behaviors, which enabled them to persist within an evolutionary niche, as primates.

This intellect confused them and was a kind of madness, resulting in all sorts of behaviors which drew them out of their niche and into conflict with other organisms in the ecosystem.

A beneficial side effect of this development was the development of intelligent strategies. Which gave them a remarkable advantage over their competitors and enabled them to spread and adapt rapidly to environmental scenarios.

The rest is history and it is commonly understood that this history is in a sense unnatural.

Do have any proof of this scenario? You did say say that you were not an anthropologist, so where did you get that from?

 

[Kumar]

Well as I see it when humanity developed intellect they tended to ignore their previous instinctual and conditioned behaviors, which enabled them to persist within an evolutionary niche, as primates.

This intellect confused them and was a kind of madness, resulting in all sorts of behaviors which drew them out of their niche and into conflict with other organisms in the ecosystem.

A beneficial side effect of this development was the development of intelligent strategies. Which gave them a remarkable advantage over their competitors and enabled them to spread and adapt rapidly to environmental scenarios.

The rest is history and it is commonly understood that this history is in a sense unnatural.

It will be quite intresting in spritual sense, where this thing is considered as Karma--act done with consious mind bringing cause & effect or casuality.

 

[dafydd]

It will be quite intresting in spritual sense, where this thing is considered as Karma--act done with consious mind bringing cause & effect or casuality.

Please provide proof that karma exists.

 

[Daylightstar]

It will be quite intresting in spritual sense, where this thing is considered as Karma--act done with consious mind bringing cause & effect or casuality.

Then:

Hi Kumar, I have composed a small general response to the list of principles you pasted above

1) Why then do you so boneheadedly insist on your own approach?
2) This doesn't mean declaring truth as expressed by others as partial.
3) Rejection instead.
4) Seemingly. This does not mean declaring all opposing views as equally valid.
5) In contradiction of 2 and 4.
6) Believe believe believe
7) Just keep on shoving your ideas down other people's throats.

From your posts emanates a sense of disruption of the principles you have presented here, suggesting a tendency towards creating human interactions that cause conflict, grief, envy, and hatred.

This will be bad for your karma, very very bad, Kumar.

 

[Kumar]

Then:

I have right to doubt everything which is not yet A&F....and therefore go on checking it by brainstorming idea. I think it is not odd.

 

[Kid Eager]

I have right to doubt everything which is not yet A&F....and therefore go on checking it by brainstorming idea. I think it is not odd.

You may believe you have that right, but it exists only in your mind. Neither is that perceived right necessary to the topic that you are posting on.

The use of "A&F" is a convenient subterfuge, as you well know, to avoid changing beliefs and claims for which a preponderance of contrary evidence exists. It's the semantic equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears to avoid hearing something that you don't like.

Having said that though, your use of that term provides a convenient flag for any party reading the thread, to recognise the point at which your claim has been disproven.

We have reached that point. End of thread.

 

[punshhh]

It will be quite intresting in spritual sense, where this thing is considered as Karma--act done with consious mind bringing cause & effect or casuality.

I am familiar with the concept of Karma. I would consider that if it does occur in nature it would be as a result of the act of creation. Humanity is the primary creator on the planet, while the majority of animals and plants do not do much creating as their behavior is primarily instinctive and conditioned (although they would have a group Karma).

So yes the development of intellect would result in the conditions for Karma to operate as Karma is described in Hinduism.

 

[dafydd]

I am familiar with the concept of Karma. I would consider that if it does occur in nature it would be as a result of the act of creation. Humanity is the primary creator on the planet, while the majority of animals and plants do not do much creating as their behavior is primarily instinctive and conditioned (although they would have a group Karma).

So yes the development of intellect would result in the conditions for Karma to operate as Karma is described in Hinduism.

The mechanism is not described. And where do all the new souls come from? (Insert proof of the existence of a soul here).I suppose that you could describe making things as an ''act of creation'' Nothing mystical about that and no reason why that should cause karma to exist. Anyway, nobody here as ever presented evidence for the existence of karma, so you are putting the cart before the horse. I noticed that you used the Laconic ''if'' yet again. We can all do that. If the Tooth fairy exists it may have been brought into existence by an act of creation.

 

[Daylightstar]

I have right to doubt everything which is not yet A&F....and therefore go on checking it by brainstorming idea. I think it is not odd.

Your 'brainstorming' appears entirely inconsequential. You're not getting anywhere.
It therefore is very odd.

 

[Kumar]

I am familiar with the concept of Karma. I would consider that if it does occur in nature it would be as a result of the act of creation. Humanity is the primary creator on the planet, while the majority of animals and plants do not do much creating as their behavior is primarily instinctive and conditioned (although they would have a group Karma).

So yes the development of intellect would result in the conditions for Karma to operate as Karma is described in Hinduism.

Thanks. Few acts happen naturally as natural duties as a result of insticts/evolution whereas other acts are man made/manipulative. Eg. Parents do their natural duty to bear & nurse their children. They do spent money on them. But they do not treat this as investment & do not expect that it will be paid back to then by their children. Whereas when a person lend or give money to other do expect & get back that money.

 

[Kumar]

You may believe you have that right, but it exists only in your mind. Neither is that perceived right necessary to the topic that you are posting on.

The use of "A&F" is a convenient subterfuge, as you well know, to avoid changing beliefs and claims for which a preponderance of contrary evidence exists. It's the semantic equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears to avoid hearing something that you don't like.

Having said that though, your use of that term provides a convenient flag for any party reading the thread, to recognise the point at which your claim has been disproven.

We have reached that point. End of thread.

Anything can also be based on adverses related to that thing. One can take precautions in taking less or non-effective thing--still benefit from placebo effects but one have to get adverses from things having adverse effects. It depend upon one liking & one's state.

 

[dafydd]

Anything can also be based on adverses related to that thing. One can take precautions in taking less or non-effective thing--still benefit from placebo effects but one have to get adverses from things having adverse effects. It depend upon one liking & one's state.

Do you mean something like swallowing sulphuric acid?

 

[Furi]

would ingestion of Amanita virosa^WP, as is completely natural and requires no cooking be of benefit,

could it also be offset by taking mental preparation, and benefiting from it's nutrition with no adverse effects.