"In other words, there must be some kind of impetus for a believer to doubt the evidences for belief in God. The second one is that the non-believer must then give some kind of reasonable argument to think God does not exist."
This is from: "Hitchens vs. Craig Debate Review" in Confident Christianity. Again, back to the concern / question / problems of faith, for one who can't trust his senses fully. The article here presents a nice, objective review. couldn't find the actual debate, would like to see it, since one debater seemed to be believed as not prepared enough for the debates.
But I wanted to continue with this quickly before my posting. One of the things with science is, if you'll excuse me, "non-existent evidence is not evidence of non existence". If you can't prove something one way or the other, then it remains a question. Science begets agnosticism, not atheism. Why? Because you can't prove either. So, in my humble opinion, an absolute on both sides can NOT be proven it requires philosophical interpretation of one's experiences!!! That's part of the definition, purpose, part n parcel of the heart of metaphysics!!!
Now, my question, my meanderings in my head bring up. It deals again with genius vs. mental difficulties, and the types of intelligence. In my life, I've run across three "intelligence types":
Academic: Here are the facts, pieces of known information, procedures, etc.
Synthesize: the "inventor" mind, the "wise elder" - seeing patterns, and searching for pattern foundations
Creative: the "dreamer" mind - the purely unconstrained "what if" without concern of cause-effect relations, just the irrational joy.
Here are a few problems with each one as an individual component:
Academic. It does not allow you to formulate plans of attack or resolution to existing NEW problems
Synthesize: Less factual, so may not function exactly as designed, or be delayed. The patterns seen, if it isn't understood about the limitations of breadth of experience, can be presented as Truth vs. Advice.
Creative: complete lack of cause-effect relations. Can ignore the academic aspect, and be completely useless
Now, I think "genius" is one who has more than just one of these types of thinking. One who can cross both the "recipe" form of thinking or note taking, into the mental visual imagery, to irrational experience and defining it. That ability to mix and match everything. One of the reasons I know Im not truly smart. I forget, I don't uniformly synthesize, and my creativity stalls.
Putting asides aside, I wonder this. Some of the bio's i read of the more Academically oriented geniuses (Leonardo, Galileo, Newton) they seem to be disconnected from society - too much left brain - and people are put off by them because they're too stupid to understand that there CAN be a difference, and the difference CAN be good. But because of the more "pure" or "complete" (may be a better word) separation of the mind, the natural disconnect that allows for the greater use of one side, the 'genius' and 'common person' cant communicate properly. So they are 'demonized' - an in some cases, truly were, as much a result of social pressures than anything. And for these lucky people, if it wasn't for the rich families, they wouldn't have the freedom to think or be saved from the townsfolk's condemnations (THEN there is the church that was just scared of "loosing" its power base)
But the smart creative-synthesizing ones ten to be seen as more loving. I think part of it is that this particular type of intelligence is more across the board. Both logic and emotional. Makes a closer connection to humanity, because the emotional is seen more often. One is not seen as being disassociated from people, because there is a more obvious sympathy and empathic reactions with others. So they are more accepted, if listen to just as little as the others. Same pain, but maybe some gain.
Here's the line I earlier though that made this whole post come to being: But the thinking patterns are different - one is truely more of a controlld irrationality, and the other is an chaotic rationality. (i so whish i had someone to help keep me warm n snuggly right now). (just letting you know the thoughts is all)
The "controlled irrationality", as I am calling it - the creative mind, the one that works similar to typical humans
(yes, we are all controlled to some extent by our hormones and moods). (like now, when I'm obsessing over my room mates laziness and how he can't brush or wash his reeking dog. he won't keep it in his room because of those problems. so he throws it on the rest of us? oh yea, so long as it doesn't bother him!!!)
so they can relate easier. The minds that can't see how pure rationality and irrationality function, for their hardware and/nor software allow them to achieve that state. (Now, now, I am not degrading that. In fact, there are times I dream of that - of the forced bliss, the state that doesn't allow you to realize the depth of ones ignorance.)
gotta smoke - im really amped today. coffee, im sure, not helping. but i live off the stuff, and i still go to sleep after a cup with no problem. i think a manic brain that became dependent on a crutch to maintain activity. Stoopid hypocritical shity self!!!!!!!!!!!!
i hadt this new set up. everytime you change the background color for some reason, it won't go back to the default background. so i end up trying to match it (like a couple of posts ago) and it looks weird. Only other default would be white, but that shows white. hmmm. time to change the old layout!!! (check the lady on the side. Very cool n nice, seen some of work. Nice, clean, crisp.)
Any way, back to the real conversation at hand. remember the talk about how the creative genius was closer to the thinking format of the 90%? That they can relate closer to "feelings" as truths, where the academic relates to feelings more as a aspect of understanding? to try to see what relevance it has with epistemology? How it fits into the great human social questions? But that's the problem. He lives it, but sees it and defines it. Sometimes the defining can take away the beauty of expression - apparently temper the fire, but the fire is just in a different place, a different drive.
Now that we are on track again, lets see where it takes us and how much fuel is in the engine. Maybe we'll even have a high speed desile drive here, but I'm feeling more like a steam engine ride. How about you?
The third intelligence, the one I feel to be of the greatest import, is the synthesizing-wisdom intelligence. This is the one that I personally would bow down to, out of respect. This is the mind that sees the patterns, and has enough, to help others recognize the basic procedure and the areas of variability. (man, ive been gone long, obsessing over cleaning dog hair, watching game, parents calling from visit to foriegn country, friends calling, im, e-mails, arrggghhhh fucking to much shit!!! okay. im better now...) even when I returned, I was delayed... some interesting interuptions, that was for sure. Very distracting. I think that this is the one most accepted - they're just eccentric, that old person doesn't know what they're talking about, it's different than when they were young... But who was alive to see how it was, how it is and the method of change? Who could guide you down the road? In the back of our minds, we know this. Even the idiots - I think it's a part of the survival instinct. Pay attention to what works or you'll get hurt or possibly die...
But those poor other minds - the ones that truly advance us, as opposed to tell us where we screwed up - those that give us new ways, they are the ones most treated like lepers in this society. Ignored, used for other's benefit as opposed to everyone’s, belittled into little, easily controlled compartments to minimize what they do, to limit them.
Boy oh boy... how the ones who don't support get the most benefit. Society is almost self destructive from the amount of mooching it does. Suck everyone dry, try to keep the lies as solid as possible, run away, find other escape goats, YELL AND SCREAM ABOUT MY RIGHTS AND HOW OTHERS ARE DOING BAD THINGS no I don't vote and no I didn't take an oath to defend this country but here is my hand. let me push you out of the way as I scream about equal rights.
Did you know naturalized citizens take an oath VERY similar to the military oath?? That we give our lives to support and defend???
That natural born citizens don't have to take. And YES, I am a natural born citizen. AND took that oath.
Go figure as to why I hate the whinny snot nosed mooching ignorant masses who don't even understand how they are destroying the society they CLAIM they live in, out of false hubris (not just false pride) which does not but fill the maw of their dross filled ego.