Schizophrenia, OCD , Autism,.... and Religion. Stanford lecture

[Elliott]

6 minutes ago, Ziran said:

I'm sorry.  I'm not understanding the objection.  The first person, assuming there was only one, would necessarily utilize the same technique(s) to investigate some "thing" beyond the material realm.

The first person to experience it, the person that created the religion experienced 'it' before the religion existed

[Ziran]

48 minutes ago, Elliott said:

The first person to experience it, the person that created the religion experienced 'it' before the religion existed

The semantics here need to be precise.  I'm not trying to be difficult, but, I'm choosing words carefully to prevent re-explaining.

At that hypothetical moment, if there was only one person involved, the "person" is not directly experiencing it.  It's still being abstracted through the microcosm of the physical realm.  There aren't extant records of this, the very first religious experience.  However, the earliest that I'm aware of used either the human body as the microcosm, or the constellations as a macrocosm.

ETA:  Primitive people directly experiencing reality falls in the category of Shamanism, not religion, imo.

Edited Sunday at 07:46 PM by Ziran

[Elliott]

2 minutes ago, Ziran said:

The semantics here need to be precise.  

The first person that experienced the experience that the religion guides you to, you said religion is necessary for the experience, how did the person that invented the religion do it then?

[Ziran]

Just now, Elliott said:

The first person that experienced the experience that the religion guides you to, you said religion is necessary for the experience, how did the person that invented the religion do it then?

In the same manner that the religion is invented today.  Religious people re-invent their religion every time it's sincerely practiced.

[Elliott]

11 minutes ago, Ziran said:

In the same manner that the religion is invented today.  Religious people re-invent their religion every time it's sincerely practiced.

Before any religion was invented, the first person to start a religion(how to "investigate 100% different from any thing") obviously didn't have a religion......

3 hours ago, Ziran said:

A religion is necessary if the target of investigation is 100% different from any "thing" in the material realm,

 

[Ziran]

2 hours ago, Elliott said:

Before any religion was invented, the first person to start a religion(how to "investigate 100% different from any thing") obviously didn't have a religion......

The religion, at that moment of inception, has only one member.  

[Elliott]

9 hours ago, Ziran said:

The religion, at that moment of inception, has only one member.  

How'd he figure it out, with no religion? You said he you can't explore 'different' without religion, he did, the guy you're talking about conceptually, did it without a religion. You're using circular reasoning, you're just saying something is true and your proof is just saying that it's true.

Edited Monday at 08:34 AM by Elliott

[Natasha Tori Maru]

Thanks for the share.

Interesting frame to look at these subjects from.

Do you think AI will have an effect on religiosity in our culture?

[Ziran]

9 hours ago, Elliott said:

How'd he figure it out, with no religion?

The earliest examples I'm aware of used the human body as a microcosm of reality, and the constellations as a macrocosm of reality.  Then, the individual would become inspired, intellectually awestruck and full of wonder.  When this awe-and-wonder are assigned an external locus of control, it naturally produces religious cognition.  Faith, hope, etc... bound to the... beyond.

Assuming that the individual is successful, consistently, then they have discovered a religious practice.

It's the success which determines whether or not the method attempted ( past tense ) was successful.  Because of this the successful method becomes a "religion practice" retroactively.

9 hours ago, Elliott said:

You said he you can't explore 'different' without religion, he did, the guy you're talking about conceptually, did it without a religion. You're using circular reasoning, you're just saying something is true and your proof is just saying that it's true.

It all depends on whether or not the method actually worked.  If so, it's a religion.  

You're very welcome to bring your own definition. 

[Elliott]

3 hours ago, Ziran said:

The earliest examples I'm aware of used the human body as a microcosm of reality, and the constellations as a macrocosm of reality.  Then, the individual would become inspired, intellectually awestruck and full of wonder.  When this awe-and-wonder are assigned an external locus of control, it naturally produces religious cognition.  Faith, hope, etc... bound to the... beyond.

Assuming that the individual is successful, consistently, then they have discovered a religious practice.

It's the success which determines whether or not the method attempted ( past tense ) was successful.  Because of this the successful method becomes a "religion practice" retroactively.

It all depends on whether or not the method actually worked.  If so, it's a religion.  

You're very welcome to bring your own definition. 

Lol

[Carl-Richard]

When Sapolsky says schizotypalism => cults, everybody cheers. When I say it, everybody loses their minds. And if you say it now, you will get banned. Funny situation we've gotten ourselves in.

Edited 16 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[UnbornTao]

Just now, Carl-Richard said:

When Saplosky says schizotypalism => cults, everybody cheers. When I say it, everybody loses their minds. And if you say it now, you will get banned. Funny situation we've gotten ourselves in.

Maybe the real cult was the friends we made along the way...

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, UnbornTao said:

Maybe the real cult was the friends we made along the way...

The only friend I made along the way was an imaginary friend with Down's syndrome telling me it's ok to be dumb in a forum filled with absolute drooling reta- I'm sorry: schizotypal otherwise mentally functionally average thereabout outstanding citizens of a 'not-a-cult' i.e. a 'new religious movement' which is the same as a cult but you will get banned if you say it's a cult.

Last time I use the word "cult", I swear, swear on my cult-Bible. Plz no ban mr. Leonidas.

And yes: warning to not talk about the contents of the video and use your mind too much because you will risk ending up as a banned member of the non-****/NRM forum. 🤐 And I'm actually being serious about that; read the last PSA thread.

Edited 14 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Elliott]

@Carl-Richard