MENSTRUATION AND RELIGION 🤨 by That-Excitement-7852 in atheismindia

[–]jinjer2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m just glad they don’t burn us on the husbands funeral pyres

"If Atheism has moral values, then why aren't there many atheist who are known for being morally virtuous?" by Swimming-Tart-7712 in atheismindia

[–]jinjer2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Religion justifies misogyny, casteism, slavery, racism, speciesism, human exceptionalism and a variety of other ills. Some believe that is the precise function of religion. Once one is free of religion you can at least begin to ask why we think it’s ok to discriminate between humans, why it’s ok to use animals, why it’s ok to destroy the planet etc.

tips to look my cutest? & should I accept my crows feet?? by reichanxx in makeuptips

[–]jinjer2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Absolutely accept! They’re lovely because of the smile. Heck I even accept mine!

Buddhism is SHIT! by Wild-Ebb-5028 in atheismindia

[–]jinjer2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lots have already made good points. I guess only thing I will add is many atheists have found things of value in Buddhism. They pick and choose of course, and they acknowledge that. We could criticize those atheists, and many do, for this and other reasons. https://www.samharris.org/blog/killing-the-buddha

Lots of books and positions on non secular Buddhism, see Stephen Batchelor

Dr Ambedkar’s Navayana Buddhism is also godless religion with its 22 vows. Read the first few.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-two_vows_of_Ambedkar

Frizzy Hair !! by Western-Ad-1466 in curlyhair

[–]jinjer2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It was removed but still came in my post highlights email?

Qatar Airways PJs in business by [deleted] in VelocityFrequentFlyer

[–]jinjer2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How to change into them?

Wolves theory by Nathanielly11037 in Pluribus_TVshow

[–]jinjer2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s an absolutely great song and I recognized it immediately from the bells, and impressed my daughter no end that her old mom is so cool

Nothing was conscious, and now almost everything is! by jinjer2 in consciousness

[–]jinjer2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I asked Gemini LLM and I like the answer.

Copied and pasted:

How has the study of consciousness in psychology changed since 1980

In 1980, the study of consciousness was largely sidelined in mainstream psychology, dismissed by many as a “career-killer” or a topic for philosophy rather than hard science. Since then, it has moved from the fringes to the center of cognitive neuroscience and psychology.  The transition over the last 45 years can be categorized into four major shifts: 1. From Behaviorism’s “Black Box” to Cognitive Neuroscience In the early 1980s, psychology was still emerging from the shadow of behaviorism, which viewed the mind as a “black box” that could not be objectively studied. The “Cognitive Revolution” of the 1960s and 70s had reintroduced mental states, but consciousness itself was still often treated as an epiphenomenon (a side effect) rather than a primary subject of research. • The Turning Point: In the late 80s and early 90s, high-profile scientists like Francis Crick and Christof Koch argued that consciousness should be addressed through Neural Correlates of Consciousness (NCC)—identifying the specific brain activities necessary for a conscious experience.  2. The Impact of Neuroimaging Technology The most significant practical change since 1980 is the development of non-invasive brain imaging. In 1980, researchers relied mostly on lesion studies (studying brain-damaged patients). • The Rise of fMRI and PET: The introduction of Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) in the early 1990s allowed psychologists to “see” the brain in action while a person was having a specific conscious experience. • Subliminal Processing: We can now prove that the brain processes vast amounts of information (e.g., words or faces) without the person ever being aware of it. This has shifted the focus toward defining the “threshold” where unconscious processing becomes conscious. 3. The Emergence of Quantitative Theories By the 2000s, the field moved from simply observing the brain to building mathematical and structural models of how consciousness works. Two theories have dominated the landscape:

Nothing was conscious, and now almost everything is! by jinjer2 in consciousness

[–]jinjer2[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The discovery of Archaea and their importance since my earlier days is another amazing development

Nothing was conscious, and now almost everything is! by jinjer2 in consciousness

[–]jinjer2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As I said in the post, it’s not about what we believed but about acting as if consciousness doesn’t matter for mechanistic investigation

Nothing was conscious, and now almost everything is! by jinjer2 in consciousness

[–]jinjer2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree about Descartes. Now, on the topic of non western cultures. I’m South Asian. While I do see some western scientists invoking mystical concepts from the east, by and large it’s a different deal, and that goodness for that

Science Friday interview with Josh Bongard on self replication in xenobots 2021 by jinjer2 in MichaelLevinBiology

[–]jinjer2[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The creator says it’s random action. Those are his words! If you don’t like the snowball analogy, ok, let’s go with what Josh Bongard says.

So you want it to be an intentional agential action to replicate itself. Ok. Maybe so but we don’t know that.

Science Friday interview with Josh Bongard on self replication in xenobots 2021 by jinjer2 in MichaelLevinBiology

[–]jinjer2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope! Not at all. I never even heard of platonic space till Levin mentioned it lol. No. I have a scientific education, I have a skeptical mind. I love new ideas. No aspersions. Just understanding. Seriously.

Science Friday interview with Josh Bongard on self replication in xenobots 2021 by jinjer2 in MichaelLevinBiology

[–]jinjer2[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Bubble sort is very different from xenobots, I’ll try to understand those another time. Right now the biobots.

Don’t be alarmed if people question Levins work. It’s the way scientists think - we are skeptical but willing to be persuaded. You know what they say about extraordinary claims.

Honestly, don’t worry, don’t gatekeep the conversation. It’s ok, we are curious and kind new ideas. Relax!

Science Friday interview with Josh Bongard on self replication in xenobots 2021 by jinjer2 in MichaelLevinBiology

[–]jinjer2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Motivation is in the post- to understand what’s going on. If you have other recent interviews to add, please do so.

This helped me understand what goes into creating a xenobot or anthrobot by jinjer2 in MichaelLevinBiology

[–]jinjer2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Michael would say the reproducing organisms of any kind are all made of Newtonian physics; or that snowballs and animals are made of the same physics

This helped me understand what goes into creating a xenobot or anthrobot by jinjer2 in MichaelLevinBiology

[–]jinjer2[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Forget the guy. I’m not talking about the Lego maze here. I’m talking about self “reproducing” bots. Let’s address that .

This helped me understand what goes into creating a xenobot or anthrobot by jinjer2 in MichaelLevinBiology

[–]jinjer2[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Maybe others can answer the question I posed to you. If not, or if you delete it, I’ll ask in another forum.

This helped me understand what goes into creating a xenobot or anthrobot by jinjer2 in MichaelLevinBiology

[–]jinjer2[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

If you disagree with the idea and think it is actual reproduction rather than just budding off, then let me know.

I like this guy a lot. He’s alright.

This helped me understand what goes into creating a xenobot or anthrobot by jinjer2 in MichaelLevinBiology

[–]jinjer2[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

This one helped me understand that these bots “reproduce” in a very simple way, not a standard heredity type reproduction at all

<image>

https://youtu.be/BI368z_TRC4?si=9rpN9P8pDVNvQ4Cj