I'm just an average dude.
Changing the current paradigm.
"Life" can change for the better. In fact it has changed for the better, it's just occurred over such a long expanse of time that it hardly seems as if that's true but; Life expectancy is longer, methods of diplomacy are better, racial injustices are better. Not at all perfect, not even close to a finished product, yet better. I reject "That's just life, deal with it" I accept "This is life, work with it.
Peaceful worldview solutions, we already have enough information of the problems.
I'm a musician. Not professionally, I no longer make money doing it.
This member doesn't have any favorite talks yet.
TEDCred score: +6.40 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A comment on Talk: Adam Davidson: What we learned from teetering on the fiscal cliff
A comment on Talk: Israel and Iran: A love story?
Ronny, You have started a "Graphic Design Meme", which may deter war. Your images are worth a thousand beautiful words each.
I say it like that because of the saying "A picture is worth a thousand words."
Nicely done.
A reply on Conversation: The bottom line is rooted in the physical and NOT in the spiritual.
''WE CAN NEVER DENY THE EXISTANCE OF THE SPIRITUAL ELEMENT IN THE WORLD, ""
Since evidence is necessary in order to draw a conclusion about anything, then I can neither accept nor deny a spiritual element. I am saying I can not know. You seem to be saying that somehow, you do know.
A comment on Conversation: The bottom line is rooted in the physical and NOT in the spiritual.
And No ""sudden explosion of light "" this would not be evidence of her love. Loyalty, honesty, understanding, these are evidence of love and this evidence is discovered over time and shared experiences together.
Nope. I have absolutely no idea what love is, as it takes many forms. I do know that when I see something I "love", I have a warm, tingly sensation inside my body. I believe (not know) that this sensation comes from the same place that interprets all my sensations. The neurological system.
""if this is all so physical and material, how come science can tell us THAT we think but not WHAT we think? (and please do not say 'Well, give them time'
Even a lie-detector is not based on our thoughts but how our body reacts to them.""
Science does not tell me THAT we think. I am thinking, that's what tells me that we think. Why would I be interested in science telling me what I think? I already know what I think. and That's right, a lie detector does not detect the lie, it detects your heart rate (and other stuff above my knowledge level), which is a physical response to the question being asked.
In the long run, my disbelief in religion or supernatural is based on the fact that the origins of our religious beliefs are very dubious and filled with many culturally based superstitions.
A reply on Conversation: The bottom line is rooted in the physical and NOT in the spiritual.
God? Spirits? I do not claim to know. The only one telling me about God is man and I absolutely do not trust a word that a man can say about a place he has never ever been.
"Swedenborg had an argument one time with a man in the world of spirits."
Really? Just because you want it to be true, does not make it so.
A comment on Conversation: The bottom line is rooted in the physical and NOT in the spiritual.
Your comment is exactly why I need science s explanation. You move freely through words and because they make sense to you, you think your words are truth and fact. We all speak from the position of (I am right), even though I know that some of the things I believe are incorrect. At least admit that you may be incorrect about your beliefs.
""The plant has something different than the stone. It is alive. It grows.""
Dirt, essentially the building block of stones, has more microbial life in a shovel scoop than there are people on this planet. The stone, to me, is just like our own skeletal system. It provides a structure on which the more fleshy systems operate. Are you suggesting the skeletal system may not be alive? I hope not.
""Mankind is different than the stone, the plant and the animal. We have the material element. We have the life element. We have feelings as well. What we have over and above these first three things is self-consciousness and thinking.""
You have to get in back of the line of people trying to tell me what animal has "consciousness" or not. Really well trained scientists, in all fields, and the religions have been discussing "consciousness" for a very long time, and a conclusion is not drawn.
I think it is safe to say that humans have an ability to recognize patterns. If you are thinking of an elephant with polka dots, you are merely placing a pattern over an already existing form. It's called absurdity and it doesn't make that elephant or the idea real. We need this type of ability in order to survive in a constantly changing environment. (Evolution) Although I as well think that our ability to think and create is astonishing, I do not "guild the lily" by adding some unobservable outside force and then use empty arguments as proof.
(" it doesn't make that elephant or the idea real.") The electrical contacts, the chemical exchanges, even thought itself is very real and can be used in some way, but not the polka dotted elephant.
A reply on Conversation: The bottom line is rooted in the physical and NOT in the spiritual.
A reply on Conversation: The bottom line is rooted in the physical and NOT in the spiritual.
'': a fish is in water, never aware that it is in a wet environment as we see it.''
You are actually telling me what a fish perceives and then basing your understanding on that fact. Your evidence is lacking reality.
A comment on Conversation: How do we get corporations out of government.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-nXT8lSnPQ
He's a fine example of One man saying volumes without saying a word.
A reply on Conversation: Videoing campaign speeches, viewing and then discussing the issues here on TED. All of them (not repeats of the same speech)
We all need better, peer reviewed, information. When we have that we will all be able to make a more informed choice.
I'm not sure I follow about the framework, so I can't say I agree or disagree there, and I agree with you about the TED community.
http://www.ted.com/talks/defend_our_freedom_to_share_or_why_sopa_is_a_bad_idea.html
However, that was helpful to me in deciding my position on what was just another vote on some acronym and probably just some mud slinging campaign slogan anyway. I would have been wrong to just leave it at that.
I think this idea would shine a light right at the candidates, exposing what they hide in the shadows.