Brain Study 1 - First the conclusions: a brain-study in parts(truth or dare?

[Guest guest]

Thanks Bob.

Sometimes I am unclear if what you post is

your writing or that of someone else.

Maybe I'll get the hang, though... something

like: " if it has lots of culiques then it's

Bob's, otherwise not " .

 

Bill

 

 

Nisargadatta , " Bob N. " <Roberibus111 wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> wrote:

> >

> > Bob, what is the source/who is the author?

> >

> > Bill

>

>

> Ok Bill here it is.......

>

> The author of Onelife and the Unified Theory:

>

> John Stevenson, BS, MS (retired)

> Electronic Engineer (Senior Engineer, Hughes),

> Engineering Services Manager (Motorola),

> Director of Quality Control (Collins),

> Meteorologist (Air Force, Chief Warrant Officer

> - wartime service),

> Teacher (electronics, DeVry Institute),

> Inventor (patents in plastics molding, internal combustion engines,

> digital music synthesis),

> Programmer (Pascal, Perl, Basic, x86 assembly),

> Student of social behavior (culture) based on real and provable

> knowledge.

>

>

> I welcome all comment, pro and con. I have made errors, of that I am

> sure. I'd like to correct them. If I stray too far from provable

> fact, be sure to tell me how I err. And if I miss an important point,

 

> please let me know.

>

> I, like any thinking creature, have my prejudices, bigotries, and

> baseless beliefs. I already understand many of these and defend them

> no longer. I am sure that others will be brought to my attention. And

> I'll listen.

>

>

> URL: http://www.onelife.com/author.html

>

>

>

>

> > Nisargadatta , " Bob N. " <Roberibus111@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Conclusions

> > > Man is not, by nature (without special training), a logical

> > > (reasoning, intelligent) creature. He is, instead, totally

> reactive

> > > (instinctive, intuitive). His behavior is determined entirely by

> > the

> > > interaction (conflict resolution, competition, cooperation,

> > > coordination) between his various instincts (genetically

> determined

> > > neural mechanisms provided by evolution for behavioral guidance).

> > > There is no mechanism for intelligence or memory which is

> separate

> > > from sensory, motor and instinct mechanisms. Man may be trained

> > (his

> > > behavior may be controlled by edict). He may be educated (he may

> be

> > > taught knowledge for use as raw material in his decision making).

> > The

> > > untrained and uneducated human is totally instinctive and not

> > capable

> > > of objective reasoning or proper cultural behavior under modern

> > > social environments. The self-disciplined and educated (if

> educated

> > > in real knowledge) human is fully capable of both. The human has

> > been

> > > provided by evolution with instincts (genetically specified

> neural

> > > mechanisms) which causes him to seek both training and education

> > (he

> > > is a competitive social animal). He is quite capable of logic,

> > > reason, and intelligence when he chooses to be so, provided that

> he

> > > learns and follows the necessary discipline and rigid

> methodology.

> > > Even then, however, he is instinctive in his goals (the need for

> > and

> > > the application of the reasoning). His instincts provide the

> > > direction, drive and power behind his every action.

> > >

> > > Man is, therefore, capable of being superior to any intelligent

> > > mechanism or creature, since he is not limited to functioning

> only

> > > with logic, reason and intelligence, thus allowing unlimited

> mental

> > > creativity and exploration. He has no mental limitation in scope,

> > > other than in his self-control over his instincts. Conversely, he

> > is

> > > also capable of being an absolute idiot, the more usual case

> since

> > he

> > > is not normally either trained or educated in intelligent thought

> > > (solid provable premises, careful logic steps, frequent

> > verification

> > > by measurement, the refusal to consider intuition, imagination

> and

> > > conjecture in other than theoretical and inventive pursuits).

> > >

> > > Unfortunately, man believes that he is naturally intelligent and

> > that

> > > he acts intelligently at all times. He does not recognize that

> all

> > of

> > > his social interaction is instinct (intuition) driven. Nor does

> he

> > > recognize that many of his instincts are archaic and only

> partially

> > > applicable. Nor does he recognize that whereas logic and reason

> > would

> > > always result in uniform behavioral action, the normal (due to

> > > mutations) divergence in instincts across the gene pool of the

> > human,

> > > will always produce divergent answers for the same behavioral

> > > questions. Where his genetically provided behavioral tendencies

> > > (instincts) fit the particular social problem, he functions well,

> > but

> > > since he is unable to sense the dividing line between his

> > instinctive

> > > (intuition, reactive decision summation) and logical reasoning,

> he

> > > usually substitutes intuition, imagination and conjecture for

> > logic,

> > > reason, and intelligence. Then he swears to its authenticity by

> > > virtue of his 'intelligence'. Mankind thus constructs entire

> fields

> > > of study in social interaction (psychology, philosophy,

> sociology,

> > > educational philosophy, political and social 'science', etc.) on

> > > false and self-serving premises and follows with faulty logical

> > > development which is rarely if ever verified, and thereby rarely

> > > true.

> > >

> > > Also, and just as unfortunate, human instincts date from times of

> > > great stress and so are primarily aimed at surviving under that

> > > ancient environment. Having overcome most of this environmental

> > > stress through the invention of shelter, clothing, food

> production

> > > and medicine, many of these instincts have become detrimental.

> > Others

> > > are time-consuming and without social value.

> > >

> > > posted: bob

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia <gdtige wrote:

>

>

> --- billrishel <illusyn a écrit :

>

>

>

> Bob, what is the source/who is the author?

>

> Bill

> \

>

> Nisargadatta , " Bob N. "

> <Roberibus111@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Conclusions

> > Man is not, by nature (without special training), a

> logical

> > (reasoning, intelligent) creature. He is, instead,

> totally reactive

> > (instinctive, intuitive). His behavior is determined

> entirely by

> the

> > interaction (conflict resolution, competition,

> cooperation,

> > coordination) between his various instincts

> (genetically determined

> > neural mechanisms provided by evolution for

> behavioral guidance).

> > There is no mechanism for intelligence or memory

> which is separate

> > from sensory, motor and instinct mechanisms. Man may

> be trained

> (his

> > behavior may be controlled by edict). He may be

> educated (he may be

> > taught knowledge for use as raw material in his

> decision making).

> The

> > untrained and uneducated human is totally

> instinctive and not

> capable

> > of objective reasoning or proper cultural behavior

> under modern

> > social environments. The self-disciplined and

> educated (if educated

> > in real knowledge) human is fully capable of both.

> The human has

> been

> > provided by evolution with instincts (genetically

> specified neural

> > mechanisms) which causes him to seek both training

> and education

> (he

> > is a competitive social animal). He is quite capable

> of logic,

> > reason, and intelligence when he chooses to be so,

> provided that he

> > learns and follows the necessary discipline and

> rigid methodology.

> > Even then, however, he is instinctive in his goals

> (the need for

> and

> > the application of the reasoning). His instincts

> provide the

> > direction, drive and power behind his every action.

> >

> > Man is, therefore, capable of being superior to any

> intelligent

> > mechanism or creature, since he is not limited to

> functioning only

> > with logic, reason and intelligence, thus allowing

> unlimited mental

> > creativity and exploration. He has no mental

> limitation in scope,

> > other than in his self-control over his instincts.

> Conversely, he

> is

> > also capable of being an absolute idiot, the more

> usual case since

> he

> > is not normally either trained or educated in

> intelligent thought

> > (solid provable premises, careful logic steps,

> frequent

> verification

> > by measurement, the refusal to consider intuition,

> imagination and

> > conjecture in other than theoretical and inventive

> pursuits).

> >

> > Unfortunately, man believes that he is naturally

> intelligent and

> that

> > he acts intelligently at all times. He does not

> recognize that all

> of

> > his social interaction is instinct (intuition)

> driven. Nor does he

> > recognize that many of his instincts are archaic and

> only partially

> > applicable. Nor does he recognize that whereas logic

> and reason

> would

> > always result in uniform behavioral action, the

> normal (due to

> > mutations) divergence in instincts across the gene

> pool of the

> human,

> > will always produce divergent answers for the same

> behavioral

> > questions. Where his genetically provided behavioral

> tendencies

> > (instincts) fit the particular social problem, he

> functions well,

> but

> > since he is unable to sense the dividing line

> between his

> instinctive

> > (intuition, reactive decision summation) and logical

> reasoning, he

> > usually substitutes intuition, imagination and

> conjecture for

> logic,

> > reason, and intelligence. Then he swears to its

> authenticity by

> > virtue of his 'intelligence'. Mankind thus

> constructs entire fields

> > of study in social interaction (psychology,

> philosophy, sociology,

> > educational philosophy, political and social

> 'science', etc.) on

> > false and self-serving premises and follows with

> faulty logical

> > development which is rarely if ever verified, and

> thereby rarely

> > true.

> >

> > Also, and just as unfortunate, human instincts date

> from times of

> > great stress and so are primarily aimed at surviving

> under that

> > ancient environment. Having overcome most of this

> environmental

> > stress through the invention of shelter, clothing,

> food production

> > and medicine, many of these instincts have become

> detrimental.

> Others

> > are time-consuming and without social value.

> >

> > posted: bob

>

> In man is the entire lay out for Perfection, all his

> vehicules have the divine emprint and capacitie for

> absolute transformation back to the One.

> In him is the Atome of pure existence.

> Don`t we ever forget that..

> Patricia

> >

 

Them's lofty words Patricia!

 

I happen to agree...

 

I'm not sure if it is still " man " at that

stage, but what unfolds unfolds *as if*

there is a majestic design.

 

So it seems to me, anyhow...

 

In other words, the unfolder it gets,

the majesticer...

is what it seems.

 

 

Bill