Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8898 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-25-2019 2:05 PM
23 online now:
caffeine, CosmicChimp, Diomedes, Dr Adequate, PaulK, ringo, Tangle (7 members, 16 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,642 Year: 3,679/19,786 Month: 674/1,087 Week: 43/221 Day: 14/29 Hour: 1/2


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House Creationist Shortage Summations Only
Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
2324
25
262728Next
Author Topic:   Creationist Shortage
Percy
Member
Posts: 18310
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 361 of 415 (669617)
07-31-2012 3:52 PM
Reply to: Message 360 by NoNukes
07-31-2012 2:50 PM


Re: Still, there is the problem of dogpiles and jerk evolutionists
NoNukes writes:

Nobody gets suspended for being off topic. Although it is probably possible to get suspended for deliberately refusing admin direction for such, I don't know anyone who gets suspended this way.

Persistence at being off-topic is usually rewarded with loss of posting permissions, usually only for that forum.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 360 by NoNukes, posted 07-31-2012 2:50 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 363 by NoNukes, posted 07-31-2012 8:02 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19759
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 6.4


Message 362 of 415 (669629)
07-31-2012 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 355 by PaulK
07-31-2012 9:03 AM


worldview conflict causes cognitive dissonance
Hi PaulK

RAZD, my assertion was that the Great Debate forum alleviated the problems of dogpiling and "jerk evolutionists". I did not claim that it solved or helped with any other problem.

And I agreed. It is actually more likely to just put off the inevitable (I've been in a few).

However I must disagree with you on the idea that creationist arguments proceed by reasoning. More typically they jump to conclusions based on a superficial - and often selective - view of the evidence, or argue from their own authority (which they expect to be accepted). Examples are not hard to find. What reasoning there is is best labelled a crude rationalisation.

I would suggest that the major difference is that creationists take the apologetic mindset which starts with conclusions and has little regard for evidence, reasoning or understanding - and they often cannot understand why anyone would not be as heavily biased in favour of their beliefs as they are.

Correct, they start with the conclusion and then try to reason how the evidence fits, that is their cultural modus operandi and firmly entrenched in their cultural worldview.

This is what causes the dissonance with evidence based first sciences whenever there is a conflict in beliefs (where there are no conflicts in beliefs the evidence is ignored as important because they know from their worldview ... like the earth is roundish).

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 355 by PaulK, posted 07-31-2012 9:03 AM PaulK has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 368 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-01-2012 12:44 AM RAZD has responded

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 363 of 415 (669631)
07-31-2012 8:02 PM
Reply to: Message 361 by Percy
07-31-2012 3:52 PM


Re: Still, there is the problem of dogpiles and jerk evolutionists
Persistence at being off-topic is usually rewarded with loss of posting permissions, usually only for that forum.

Exactly. Persistence, not simply posting an off topic message, but continuing to break the rules despite warnings.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison


This message is a reply to:
 Message 361 by Percy, posted 07-31-2012 3:52 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 364 by Minnemooseus, posted 07-31-2012 11:28 PM NoNukes has responded

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3708
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 364 of 415 (669646)
07-31-2012 11:28 PM
Reply to: Message 363 by NoNukes
07-31-2012 8:02 PM


The creationist goes off-topic and the evos gladly follow
So, should the evolutionists that follow going off-topic also be treated equally?

Moose


This message is a reply to:
 Message 363 by NoNukes, posted 07-31-2012 8:02 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 365 by NoNukes, posted 07-31-2012 11:43 PM Minnemooseus has acknowledged this reply
 Message 372 by RAZD, posted 08-01-2012 9:53 AM Minnemooseus has acknowledged this reply

    
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 365 of 415 (669647)
07-31-2012 11:43 PM
Reply to: Message 364 by Minnemooseus
07-31-2012 11:28 PM


Re: The creationist goes off-topic and the evos gladly follow
So, should the evolutionists that follow going off-topic also be treated equally?

Other than objecting to the goofy title "evolutionist" sure. But again, nobody gets punished for simply being off topic.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison


This message is a reply to:
 Message 364 by Minnemooseus, posted 07-31-2012 11:28 PM Minnemooseus has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 366 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-01-2012 12:35 AM NoNukes has responded
 Message 367 by foreveryoung, posted 08-01-2012 12:43 AM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

  
Bolder-dash
Member (Idle past 1710 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009


Message 366 of 415 (669648)
08-01-2012 12:35 AM
Reply to: Message 365 by NoNukes
07-31-2012 11:43 PM


nobody gets banned for being off topic, wink.
You are right nonukes, nobody REALLY gets suspended for being off-topic, what they really get suspended for is for complicating admin's stated purpose of convincing fence sitters. But of course he needs a good looking reason to suspend someone other than that, so its called "being off topic."

Its easy to call someone off topic isn't it, if any words you type don't match the title of the OP you can say someone is off topic. Its the easiest way in the world for admin to just ban someone he doesn't like. Its kind of odd that only creationists get banned for being off topic, don't you think?

Or we are just to believe that evolutionists are just so superior at staying on message, and that's the real reason?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 365 by NoNukes, posted 07-31-2012 11:43 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 374 by NoNukes, posted 08-01-2012 11:10 AM Bolder-dash has responded
 Message 377 by ringo, posted 08-01-2012 11:49 AM Bolder-dash has not yet responded

  
foreveryoung
Member (Idle past 163 days)
Posts: 901
Joined: 12-26-2011


Message 367 of 415 (669649)
08-01-2012 12:43 AM
Reply to: Message 365 by NoNukes
07-31-2012 11:43 PM


Re: The creationist goes off-topic and the evos gladly follow
What is goofy about the title evolutionist?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 365 by NoNukes, posted 07-31-2012 11:43 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

    
Bolder-dash
Member (Idle past 1710 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009


(1)
Message 368 of 415 (669650)
08-01-2012 12:44 AM
Reply to: Message 362 by RAZD
07-31-2012 6:44 PM


I think you have your own cognitive dissonance. Its an easy charge to make isn't it?

Just say you have the evidence and the other side doesn't. If you say the evidence points to what you say it does, that's all you have to do right? You can paste a graph and say see, look these fossils look similar, evolution is true! Or see, bacteria can adapt to different food sources, Darwinian evolution has been proven! See, we have evidence, its you who has a hard time accepting reality!

You whole claim of who has cognitive dissonance has no evidence, but that doesn't stop you from repeating the claim ad infinitum.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 362 by RAZD, posted 07-31-2012 6:44 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 373 by RAZD, posted 08-01-2012 10:24 AM Bolder-dash has not yet responded

  
Bolder-dash
Member (Idle past 1710 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009


Message 369 of 415 (669651)
08-01-2012 1:03 AM
Reply to: Message 346 by Genomicus
07-30-2012 8:54 PM


I am wondering f you have really thought that much about your theory as whole. I don't disagree that there is some truth to your idea that there is intelligence inherit in the genome, which facilitates its ability to survive and adapt and prosper.

But then you say things which are completely contradictory and can't be meshed.

quote:
Let me clarify. If you loaded a genome with genes that will later be used by animals, then you've significantly improved the chances of animals evolving. Why? Because you don't have to rely on the blind watchmaker to tinker around and "just happen" to stumble across those genes necessary for the origin of animals. Thus, the "trajectory" of evolution is biased in a specific direction. The "deck is stacked" in favor of the appearance of animals.

How would you know they would later be used by animals, if we are going to let random mutations and natural selection decide what happens next? Animals are inevitable under the random mutations and natural selection formula? Why should that be? Why isn't a thick grey ooze that lasts forever and consumes sunlight the most inevitable outcome, or anything else for that matter? Why isn't extinction the most inevitable?

And this statement:

quote:
At the heart of the design hypothesis is engineering of the initial genomes such that they are biased to evolve in planned directions and random mutation and natural selection.

How can that statement possibly be reconciled. It makes no sense at all. The genome is biased to evolve in a planned direction, through a completely random unplanned trajectory? Maybe that's not really what you meant to say, because there are so many flaws in that logic its hard to know where to begin.

You are trying to combine the idea of a random unguided process, with the idea of a pre-planned guided blueprint; two completely incompatible ideas. Its an impossibility.

{Off-topic content hidden. Use "peek" if you must see it. - Adminnemooseus}

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Hide and off-topic banner.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 346 by Genomicus, posted 07-30-2012 8:54 PM Genomicus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 371 by Percy, posted 08-01-2012 9:48 AM Bolder-dash has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16086
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 370 of 415 (669655)
08-01-2012 1:31 AM
Reply to: Message 320 by Bolder-dash
07-30-2012 1:39 AM


Re: levels and levels and levels
Finally, it insults my sensibilities to watch someone like Dr.A be able to post crap like this in another thread about cosmology to another poster who is so much smarter than he is, that he makes Dr.A look like a mosquito:

Ah, you've finally found an atheist you admire. He may dismiss the existence of God as "pure fiction", and "perfectly contradictory and absurd", but at least he's being wrong about science in order to prop up his religious opinions, so I suppose that gives the two of you something in common.

{Hide off-topic snark (or something like that). - Adminnemooseus}

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Hide and banner.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 320 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-30-2012 1:39 AM Bolder-dash has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18310
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 371 of 415 (669656)
08-01-2012 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 369 by Bolder-dash
08-01-2012 1:03 AM


This is an excellent discussion of a topic, it just doesn't happen to be this topic. If you'd like to discuss Genomicus's views on ID then just propose a thread over at Proposed New Topics.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 369 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-01-2012 1:03 AM Bolder-dash has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 378 by Genomicus, posted 08-01-2012 12:12 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply
 Message 380 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-01-2012 12:43 PM Percy has responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19759
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 6.4


Message 372 of 415 (669657)
08-01-2012 9:53 AM
Reply to: Message 364 by Minnemooseus
07-31-2012 11:28 PM


Re: The creationist goes off-topic and the evos gladly follow
Minnemooseus

So, should the evolutionists that follow going off-topic also be treated equally?

They should be more aware of how to handle the issue (like start a side topic in coffee house and direct comment there, if admin wants to move from there to another forum that can be done)

It is just as annoying to thread followers and tends to make the off-topic discussions more persistent to the point of disrupting the threads.

Perhaps it should be a new ground rule ...

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 364 by Minnemooseus, posted 07-31-2012 11:28 PM Minnemooseus has acknowledged this reply

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19759
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 6.4


Message 373 of 415 (669660)
08-01-2012 10:24 AM
Reply to: Message 368 by Bolder-dash
08-01-2012 12:44 AM


Hi Bolder-dash

You whole claim of who has cognitive dissonance has no evidence, but that doesn't stop you from repeating the claim ad infinitum.

Everyone has cognitive dissonance, in different degrees and on different topics. It is due as much to your cultural upbringing, education, opinions than anything else (example difference between liberal and conservative outlooks and gun control).

It is a much studied phenomena in psychology, and thus there actually is an evidentiary basis for it.

Cognitive dissonance - (Wikipedia, 2012)
Cognitive dissonance is a discomfort caused by holding conflicting cognitions (e.g., ideas, beliefs, values, emotional reactions) simultaneously. In a state of dissonance, people may feel surprise, dread, guilt, anger, or embarrassment.[1] The theory of cognitive dissonance in social psychology proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance by altering existing cognitions, adding new ones to create a consistent belief system, or alternatively by reducing the importance of any one of the dissonant elements.[1] An example of this would be the conflict between wanting to smoke and knowing that smoking is unhealthy; a person may try to change their feelings about the odds that they will actually suffer the consequences, or they might add the consonant element that the smoking is worth short term benefits. A general view of cognitive dissonance is when one is biased towards a certain decision even though other factors favour an alternative.[2]

Cognitive dissonance theory warns that people have a bias to seek consonance among their cognitions. According to Festinger, we engage in a process he termed "dissonance reduction", which he said could be achieved in one of three ways: lowering the importance of one of the discordant factors, adding consonant elements, or changing one of the dissonant factors. [5] This bias gives the theory its predictive power, shedding light on otherwise puzzling irrational and even destructive behavior.

Dissonance is aroused when people are confronted with information that is inconsistent with their beliefs. If the dissonance is not reduced by changing one's belief, the dissonance can result in misperception or rejection or refutation of the information, seeking support from others who share the beliefs, and attempting to persuade others to restore consonance.

An early version of cognitive dissonance theory appeared in Leon Festinger's 1956 book, When Prophecy Fails. This book gave an inside account of the increasing belief that sometimes follows the failure of a cult's prophecy. The believers met at a pre-determined place and time, believing they alone would survive the Earth's destruction. The appointed time came and passed without incident. They faced acute cognitive dissonance: had they been the victim of a hoax? Had they donated their worldly possessions in vain? Most members chose to believe something less dissonant: the aliens had given earth a second chance, and the group was now empowered to spread the word: earth-spoiling must stop. The group dramatically increased their proselytism despite the failed prophecy.[14]

That third paragraph ties into confirmation bias

Confirmation Bias (Wikipedia, 2012)
Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.[1] People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. For example, in reading about gun control, people usually prefer sources that affirm their existing attitudes. They also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).

A series of experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people's conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way.

Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence. Poor decisions due to these biases have been found in military, political, and organizational contexts.

And here the invasion of Iraq comes to mind as an example of this effect in a non-creation\evolution issue.

I've been discussing this on Cognitive Dissonance and Cultural Beliefs, where the focus is more on dissonance between cultural groups than on individuals. Of course the individuals are involved coming from inside the cultural groups, but it appears that the group is a more important driver in understanding the tenacity of beliefs.

For me, one of the issues I find most dissonant is why showing a creationist a long list of information and evidence for the age of the earth (ie Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1) doesn't result in an epiphany of understanding that the earth is indeed old.

What I come to understand from looking at cognitive dissonance between cultural groups is that reinforcement from within a persons cultural group is a buffer\barrier against being forced to change the belief due to the confirmation bias they can fall back on.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 368 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-01-2012 12:44 AM Bolder-dash has not yet responded

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 374 of 415 (669663)
08-01-2012 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 366 by Bolder-dash
08-01-2012 12:35 AM


Re: nobody gets banned for being off topic, wink.
You are right nonukes, nobody REALLY gets suspended for being off-topic, what they really get suspended for is for complicating admin's stated purpose of convincing fence sitters. But of course he needs a good looking reason to suspend someone other than that, so its called "being off topic."

I don't expect you to accept the blame for anything you do. If admin were looking for an excuse to ban you, it wouldn't be terribly difficult to find one.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison


This message is a reply to:
 Message 366 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-01-2012 12:35 AM Bolder-dash has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 375 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-01-2012 11:23 AM NoNukes has responded

  
Bolder-dash
Member (Idle past 1710 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009


(1)
Message 375 of 415 (669664)
08-01-2012 11:23 AM
Reply to: Message 374 by NoNukes
08-01-2012 11:10 AM


Re: nobody gets banned for being off topic, wink.
Right.

Like calling a post off topic and hiding it, in a coffee house forum that is not supposed to be moderated you mean?

I guess every other post in this thread is exactly on the topic of creationist shortages. I can see that clearly.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 374 by NoNukes, posted 08-01-2012 11:10 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 376 by NoNukes, posted 08-01-2012 11:28 AM Bolder-dash has not yet responded
 Message 381 by NoNukes, posted 08-01-2012 1:57 PM Bolder-dash has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
2324
25
262728Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019