Jump to content

Peterkin

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    108
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Peterkin last won the day on July 27

Peterkin had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

22 Nice

2 Followers

About Peterkin

  • Rank
    Baryon
  • Birthday 05/22/1947

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.montland.ca/Vera_Blog.htm

Profile Information

  • Location
    Ontario, Canada
  • Interests
    aesthetics, animals, anthropology, art, consciousness, craft, ecology, ethics, extraterrestrial life, forensics, gardening, literature, medicine, psychology, sociology
  • College Major/Degree
    C College Of Medical Laboratory Technologists Of Ontario; CSLT registration; extra courses at UofT,
  • Favorite Area of Science
    medicine, ecology, psychology
  • Biography
    long, long ago, in a country far, far away.... meh, I've had six lives since then, none of them particularly interesting
  • Occupation
    semi-extinct scribbler

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The graphs I'v seen correlated party affiliation and educational level, which isn't at all the same thing as intelligence. I found one that you can use as a starting point. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289620300350 I'd approach it warily, however, as they seem to be looking for genetic factors.
  2. Fair assessment. (Q. Which is more likely to start thinking about a refill before the bar closes?) Where did I say that sport and science were "bad"? These are not things that exist in themselves or have any intrinsic value or quality - these are just activities in which people engage; what people do. (There isn't much evil you can do with music, but people still find a way to abuse it.) Sorry! I'm happy to learn that South Africa was united by sport.
  3. I know whom you mean. And, it's true, most people don't know how science is involved, but they're quite aware that they themselves are using technology. What they generally don't distinguish is the fiction of "Science" as a big monolithic entity that speaks with a single voice and follows a single agenda, from the reality of piecemeal, uncoordinated scientific activities aimed at disparate outcomes for disparate reasons. How are they relevant? I was responding to: Who are this "we" that use science? And those are two different spheres: organization of society and improving l
  4. We can't help being aware. The contempt is deliberately manufactured by unscrupulous actors who want to co-opt some function of science to their own benefit, while turning their followers away from understanding it. who! Those are two very different purposes. Organization is not at all the same as improvement. Some application of science plays a part in just about every aspect of modern life, but Science as a way of approaching reality doesn't: it tends to be pushed aside by politics, monetary self-interest and religion. In all regards. Solar panels and 'smart' missiles
  5. In defence of the community: in a flood relief or fire-fighting or evacuation effort. In shared projects for mutual benefit, such as building a bridge or inventing a vaccine. In support of some vulnerable, weaker entity - like polar bears or monarch butterflies. In overcoming a threat or recovering from a crisis that affects everyone. In the wise use of resources. (not in blind, unthinking zeal for a demagogue or simplistic ideal) I'm nut sure how Science can be enlisted to support social organization. I think the understanding has to come first and the use of s
  6. Depend on the "something", my relationship with the person or persons I might tell it to and the affect of that truth on their knowing it or not knowing it. I'm not always in position to judge the truth value of a datum that's come my way; nor am I confident of judging accurately the general good. Sometimes people are upset when told something they really need to know (Dad, I'm gay.) and later come to terms with far more easily than if they had been kept in the dark. Sometimes, OTOH, potentially upsetting knowledge is better withheld. (The grandfather you idolized thought you were a twi
  7. Sure - anything we share a positive enthusiasm about. Unfortunately, while we're often positive and enthusiastic about the same things, we're not that good at the sharing part.
  8. You know how something you think, hear, read, notice, smell or taste can conjure up a picture in your mind? it happens all the time and it's nearly always a fleeting, trivial image that you forget right away. But once in a while, something triggers a really powerful response. You get a clear, bright, significant picture that's worth storing in long-term memory. That you either want to look at, again and again, like a photo album, or else that pops up, uninvited, in association with new input. Some of these graphic images are horrific, but you can't turn them off. Some, on the other hand,
  9. It can be both. in fact, if it is not both, it's useless. Loving has nothing to do with ethics. What you need ethics for is to prescribe how you ought to treat the people you don't love, or particularly care about, and even more significantly, the people who get in your way, whom you can use, whom you fear. It's about what allows a society to survive, prosper and thrive - all quite reasonable aims. So the "study" of ethics is really concerned with how disparate human beings can coexist. The "ought" is added later, when the "how" is fitted to the philosophical principles on which a part
  10. See, they have that in common, too! Well, I sometimes come back to it - does that count?
  11. Disappointed about the cuckoo clock! But when I bethink the Swiss and Bavarian geography, customs, architecture, lifestyle... I guess it's all right.
  12. Even if those were the actual choices, I'd take the clock. What came out of that period in Italy would have happened somewhere, anyway, because it was time - but who else was ever going to come with the cuckoo clock? (I'll pass on the muesli, if it's all right...)
  13. - To entertain the children; prevent whining, tantrums, wheedling, boredom and sibling strife in order to keep the parents functioning until they reach self-sufficiency. - To keep a child occupied, giving the parents some alone-time to recombine their DNA. - To cull the prepubescent herd, as per article linked by The Vat ^^. - To test relative intelligence, physical stamina and attention-span for vocational sorting (you want to send the tough, aggressive and stupid off to boot-camp asap and train the more valuable 'keepers' for long term occupations. - To build the soci
  14. Yeah, but dead people are so much easier to get along with than the so-and-so with the weak bladder three seats over, and the painted idjit jumping up and spilling his beer at every near miss by the wrong team!
  15. Yes, there is. Play is play; work is work. If you play for pay, it turns into work. That's a legitimate perspective. but it doesn't get any closer to your opening claim about uniting "us". Mandela's opinion notwithstanding. Actually, the least enjoyable FIFA world cup was 2010: vuvuzelas are worse than bagpipes!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.