Nathan_Jr

Great. Thanks. Did you watch the Donald Hoffman videos?

Does this article assert the claim that confabulation is fundamental?

Where is the argument for confabulation being fundamental as proposed by a cognitive neuroscientist? A paper? A talk?

This is my favorite phrase lately. Especially, in its original context.

What about the citation for confabulation being fundamental? Any papers I can read? Lectures or discussions I can listen to? Also, please list, briefly, three things forgotten. Answer Waysider's question.

I recognize that it's all f'd. I'm not asking about right or wrong doctrine, just simply, which is the inner most circle of Pharasitic self-righteousness as taught by twi? The family or the household?

Right. But is the family different from the household. Doesn't it get further delimited through the hierarchy - body>household>family? Or something like that? I'm probably misremembering or I'm just confused.

Yep, the division. What about the family? Isn't there a distinction between the family and the household? Maybe I'm misremembering.

The meaning of words has never been important to Mike. They mean whatever he imagines them to mean and expects everyone to read his mind. I might even say it's not quite a hypothesis, it's a mere consideration. But nobody really knows, like the meaning of 'San Diego.'

Does anyone know if Mike has children? I'd ask Mike directly, if I thought I could get a direct answer. I'll gladly reveal, if I haven't already, that I'm divorced with a beautiful 13 year old son.

Anyone got the links to these?

"...it was just a group of folks (superstar brain scientists) getting together..." Just sayin

It also works for super-star authors,... Does it? ...who spend a lot of time reading in airport lounges. They do?

And it barely scratches the surface. But it's less than 10% the length of PFAL - 36 focking hours! Yikes!

Deep questions, WW. I'm not done thinking about this, but here are my initial thoughts. If the ideology was consumed and practiced privately, the harm would only be localized, confined, private, like the racist old man down the street who never talks to anyone, but everyone knows he's a die hard member of the Klan - the hate consumes itself and he suffers alone until his death, all the while BELEEVING he's right. HOWEVER, evangelizing and proselytizing are fundamental to victor's ideology - more converts, more rewards. The ideology promotes division among families and friends. It promotes willful ignorance and strife. So, by its nature, it's not a private affair. We all have experienced or witnessed the suffering this causes. My simple moral compass is dialed to promoting well-being and reducing suffering. Victor's ideology is self-centered, and divisive - qualities that neither promote well-being nor reduce suffering.

83. Because watching a man squatting over and taking a dump in the mouth of God for 36 hour sucks.

Not so fast!

Here ya go, Mike. The TedTalk is for a wider audience and easier to understand, it seems to me. The Lex Friedman podcast is a deeper and more granular treatment with lots of math and science that goes over my head, but I still found it fascinating and profitable - it should be a walk in the garden for you. I don't remember confabulation mentioned once.

You did?

I was trying to find this exchange midst all the muck and the mire. Thanks. Mike's comment makes me think of children screaming at each other: My god can beat up your god!! This is something to contemplate.

Mike: "My approach is to de-mystify free will and look for it in Biology as a deterministic mechanism like digestion. I have to re-define "freedom" here but that is ok, because it needs it." I rest my case. Again.

Met a girl, fell in love, glad as I can be

I see free will as being like a muscle. You do? It can be out of shape and weak. It can? There are all kinds of tricks that we can do to strengthen it, and make it function again. There are? I have been picking up tips for my research from links like this, and in groups that specialize in quitting smoking or changing eating habits. You have? In addition to being LIKE a muscle, my research is indicating that free will is IDENTICAL to learning; just complicated, self-directed learning. Is that what your research indicates?

Mike: It is more complicated when spirit is present It is? Mike: That in itself is good reason to resort to the less complicated, body and soul man. It is? Mike: I don't need to know the exact reasons, and neither do you, to look FIRST at the simple before graduating to the more complex. You don't? And neither do I? Mike: Now, THAT being said, I might speculate that having spirit means more avenues of learning. You might? Mike: Since my analysis shows free will is a complex learning thing, It does? Mike: it is too complicated to consider learning via spirit. It is? Mike: Maybe God can boost "will power" via spirit. Maybe he can? Mike: PLUS, if I want to make my research marketable to neuroscientists, I must start with the body and soul man. Must you? Mike: That is all they want to hear about. It is?

Mike: I'm not understanding what you mean here. Not since victor's regurgitating of Bullinger's four crucified error has someone failed so deeply to understand. Mike: Instead of silencing me or shuffling me off to a closet, why not look at your own house and see if you are throwing out the PFAL baby with the bathwater. Never leave a rotting corpse in the bathtub. Throw that waterhead baby out! Mike: If you were building a mindful model of what went wrong at TWI, it would not collapse at my mere posting. Mike's posting CONFIRMS what is wrong at TWI and PFAL. The only things collapsing are Mike's logical fallacies and failed propositions under the weight of Mike's logical fallacies and failed propositions.