301. Fleabytes

Comment #140817 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 5:01 pm

clodhopper

maybe we are overplaying the rationality card a bit.

< sulkily >Why am I having an impression of deja vu?< /sulkily >

302. Fleabytes

Comment #140771 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 2:52 pm

Geoff

feed them to the goats?

Feed them to the goats?
Feed them to the goats?
Let me just ask you one simple question, and don't try to squirm out of it:
Does factoring over-fed goats into the Kolmogorov axioms of probability, and/or the mathematical definition of a stochastic process actually license deductively valid arguments for or against the existence of Thursday mornings, or guarana?
If you are unable to address this fundamental issue, I suggest you piss off.
(I've got a cafetiere full of piping hot Brazilian coffee, if you don't know where to piss off to!)

303. Fleabytes

Comment #140758 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 2:27 pm

veronad :

Thoughts?

Thoughts, like in... er,.. "thinking"?
If you're asking people to "think", I'm not sure you're in the right place on a Saturday night, after a fourth Welsh victory, Cartomancer hallucinating and Steve and Paula preparing to throw Christians and/or their ideas into the nearest waste disposal unit.

304. Fleabytes

Comment #140753 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 2:20 pm

Cartomancer :

Richard Morgan is a hermit monk living in the Outer Hebrides with a herd of goats

So, according to your descriptions, I am the only one in the bunch with a satisfying sex life?

305. Fleabytes

Comment #140701 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 11:43 am

Paula Kirby :

Ah, Steve, you surely weren't taken in by this innocent-looking exterior, were you?

Which innocent-looking exterior?
I can (and have done!) think of lots of adjectives I could use to describe the face you chose to reveal in your avatar - and "innocent-looking" is not one of them!
I won't list them here (unless asked, by yourself) - all will be revealed in your musical portrait!

306. When blasphemy bit the dust

Comment #140657 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 8:36 am

Off topic :
If you haven't been over to the Fleabytes Thread recently, you won't know about the musical portraits I've been composing.
Also, to be perfectly honest, if you haven't read this thread,then there's a whole pile of stuff you don't know!

http://www.myspace.com/fleabytes


Lotsa luvvies,

Richard (the other one).

307. Fleabytes

Comment #140654 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 8:31 am

clodhopper!!!!!
A phenomena?????
"A" phenomena?

why all the other religions are 'wrong'.

That's an easy one. It's for the same reason that in my (ex-)father-in-law's eyes, all his daughter's partners were worthless, good-for-nothing, lying,cowardly cretins.
I'm pretty certain that I don't approve of his reasoning, however....

308. Fleabytes

Comment #140650 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 8:20 am

PBUM : I'm sorry - I hadn't factored in the Joneses, so I stand corrected, reproved and humiliated.
But mostly humiliated, actually . Cos I quote enjoy that. You couldn't pop over here and actually flog me for a little while, could you?. I have a wonderful latex and leather collection of...

Oh sugar - wrong thread!
Excuse me folks - I've just been reading the FCOS forum, and it always does this to me.

309. Fleabytes

Comment #140647 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 7:56 am

Professor Dawkins - you don't need to reply to my question about "reverse evolution", thanks all the same. I've just read whatthe.?!'s post, and it quite adequately answers the question for me.

310. Fleabytes

Comment #140644 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 7:49 am

Storeo

What? No new evidence to support the belief in god?

You clearly were not watching the same match as me, boyo!

311. Fleabytes

Comment #140639 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 7:40 am

PBUM :

Lovely.

I think I agree, but just to make sure - was this a comment or your signature?
Though to be honest, at certain moments during the second half, I began to wonder quite seriously of the possibility of "reverse evolution"?
Richard Dawkins, please, is this possible during the Six Nations Tournament, or is it limited to Fundamentalist Evangelical Revivals?
I'm more of a sentimental musician than a biologist, you understand and your expert scientific appraisal of the situation would be much appreciated.

312. Fleabytes

Comment #140614 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 2:21 am

See you all later.
Six Nations Tournament and the shopping.

313. Fleabytes

Comment #140610 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 2:02 am

As you may know, I am having a passionate affair with Brazil. And that's a country where the word "fora" has a meaning that evokes so many happy moments for me!
I'll let you Google it - it'll keep you out of mischief for two minutes, at least.

314. Fleabytes

Comment #140606 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 1:43 am

Steve Zara

UGSOME

What a brillig idea! Oh, frabjous day!

315. Fleabytes

Comment #140604 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 1:34 am

Paula Kirby

Fora and Fauna

My, am I glad to see you're out of bed at last!
Up and posting - that's good news. But I need you over on the Crossing the Divide thread. I have got my knickers in such a twist over there, I can't remember what sex I am or why!!
Fora and Fauna! I love it!
The Richard and Paula Show? Ha!
Richer and Poorer, perhaps.
Or, thinking of my ex-wives "Richard and poor 'er".

316. Crossing the Divide

Comment #140600 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 1:27 am

Steve - it's PM time.

317. Crossing the Divide

Comment #140596 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 1:03 am

Steve Zara - glad we understand each other. Perhaps we can work as a team : you drive over people, and I'll come along with the ambulance.
(That's not as cruel as it sounds...)
(If it sounds too cruel I'll delete it.
There - click, click, deleted, sins washed away, never happened and all that.
Ah, if only life were that simple, huh?)
EDIT :I think reason can sway unconvinced believers. Check out the Converts Corner to see how many of the "conversion" stories include stuff like:

I do not know if I was ever a "true believer".

I had never fully believed in my upbringing faith of Christianity.

Despite these aggressive attempts at indoctrination, I had my doubts.

And yet, I could never believe there was a god.

I remember, even as a toddler of four, thinking to myself "something doesn't feel right".

I haven't properly believed in God since I was about nine.

You've guessed it - I have checked out ALL those stories.

EDIT :

I'll leave it for people who actually know something about this

As a teacher, I often say to my young colleagues : "The kids don't care how much you know, until they know how much you care."
(I teach in a college - pupils in the 11 - 15 age range, in a very socially deprived part of town.)

318. Crossing the Divide

Comment #140591 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 12:45 am

Steve Zara : I agree that this guy's situation was somewhat unusual, but the issues being evoked are not all that rare. I'm talking about the whole "relationship/ emotions" thing here.
His thinking underwent a "sea change" in a particular set of circumstances. Agreed.
But the questions of:
"But reason alone is rarely enough to sway believers."
and
"We need to figure out among students changing their minds, what does that?"
and
"You can live your life just fine and not know squat about evolution."
really do go right to the heart of "the situation facing us."
The "us" in question being atheists who participate in this site and who by definition, can not be content to just let religion continue doing "business as usual."
We are confronted with, and must address all the distress that Godfrey and others have to face.
Without forgetting the cognitive dissonance that can make a person deaf to pure reason ( as ironical as that may sound.)
(You will have guessed that I, personally, have been through a living hell on account of religion. Do I have an agenda? You betcha, I do.)
With regards to your Penrose quotation, let me relate a little anecdote which is quite amusing and will probably help me to calm down.
When my sons were 4 and 6 years-old respectively, I was walking with them through the local cemetery as a short-cut to the supermarket.
The four year-old looked at the tombstones and asked me what they were. I explained to him about burying people when they died.
He stopped in front of a particularly ominous looking tomb, and asked, "But isn't it awfully cold when you're in there?"
His older brother, snorted unkindly and said, "Don't de daft! When you're in there, you aren't in there any more."
And that was the end of the discussion!

319. Crossing the Divide

Comment #140583 by Richard Morgan on March 8, 2008 at 12:13 am

PAULA - WHERE ARE YOU?
This article is crying out for a comment from you. It says so much, nearly everything in fact, about the situation facing us.

irate-atheist :

No vicars (except for close relations and friends) allowed.

Amazing!
Just how many of your close relations and friends are vicars? Sounds like one helluva family!

But reason alone is rarely enough to sway believers.

He drew a circle that shut me out--
Heretic, rebel, a thing to flout.
But Love and I had the wit to win:
We drew a circle that took him in!

If that doesn't work, just call him a "fucktard" and resume normal posting as soon as possible.

For those immersed in, or close to the Mormon morass, try this technique.
Do what they do.
Put on a glazed, semi-trance-like expression and bear your testimony to them. You can repeat the exact same sentence several times, it will not diminish the effect, quite the contrary.
Are you ready?
1. Look the person in the eyes. This means fixing your gaze on the bridge of his nose, which gives the effect of looking into the depths of his soul.
2. In a very sotto voce tone of voice (which forces him to concentrate on what you're saying), repeat several times, "I know there is no god."
3. Since we're dealing with Mormons, you could also use : "I know that Joseph Smith was not a prophet of god." and:
4. "I know that Thomas S. Monson is not a prophet of god."
The use of the verb "know" rather than "believe" is very important here. Firstly, because that's what they do.
Secondly - studies have shown that in courts of law, juries tend to believe witnesses who are apparently convinced of the truthfulness of what they are saying, however implausible it may be, rather than people simply relating the facts, in a calm, reasonable manner.
I'll let the psychologists or Ted Haggard explain the whys and wherefores of all that - but it works with sickening frequency.

320. Fleabytes

Comment #140578 by Richard Morgan on March 7, 2008 at 11:02 pm

Steve Zara :

Has anyone used them regularly?

I haven't.
(This is what is called a useful, meaningful, thought-provoking post.)
(Or not).
Because posting here is rather like impulse buying. You just amble through the thread, and when you see something interesting or thought-provoking, Hop!, you post and move on.
Using a forum implies a rather more organised approach, like making a shopping list and knowing which shops you're going to and why.
And with whom.
And when.
And if you're too, too busy posting 2,800 comments here, well, I mean, who's got time for fora (or "forums" in Zara-speak)?

PS I had a sleepless night too.

321. Fleabytes

Comment #140568 by Richard Morgan on March 7, 2008 at 10:01 pm

robotaholic

am i doing something wrong?

That, my friend, is a dangerous question to ask in this thread.

322. Crossing the Divide

Comment #140540 by Richard Morgan on March 7, 2008 at 6:44 pm

But reason alone is rarely enough to sway believers.

"We need to figure out among students changing their minds, what does that?" says Jason Wiles

"You can live your life just fine and not know squat about evolution," he says.

Reading this article simultaneously broke my heart and fired up my determination to.....well,er....do something.
One thing, however, is sure : in the light of all this, Richard Dawkins.Net has a clear and unambiguous raison d'etre.

323. Fleabytes

Comment #140539 by Richard Morgan on March 7, 2008 at 6:32 pm

Steve Zara

Of course, some Malthusian factor will come into play before that. I wonder what it will be..

I don't remember reading that Malthus factored in the Rapture...

324. Fleabytes

Comment #140533 by Richard Morgan on March 7, 2008 at 5:20 pm

mikejswalker : I think you just gave me the title of my next song :"Eternal salvation can be short-lived."
I love it.
Thank you so much!

325. Fleabytes

Comment #140529 by Richard Morgan on March 7, 2008 at 4:52 pm

mikejswalker

Please don't tell me you just got that together since I sent you my post!! Jesus!

Well, yes, actually.
It's amazing what you can do with copy/paste once the ideas start flowing!
Also, you have perfectly understood what I was trying to say in the "WeeFlea's always right" piece. You know, even the WeeFlea has a heart and I have deeply ingrained in me the feeling of, "love the sinner but hate the sin", if you see what I mean.
So I took a few measures to recognise the fellow human being behind all the incoherence, manipulation and lies.
But as I said before, it's so much easier to be nasty than to be nice, so the piece ends as it begins.

326. Fleabytes

Comment #140524 by Richard Morgan on March 7, 2008 at 4:24 pm

You know what I'm finding here on this "soul-less" atheist site?

I'm finding friendship, intellectual exchange,amusing little cat-fights that don't last long, the occasional dick-head, inspiration, encouragement, laughter, compassion, understanding, acceptance, people willing to doubt, to apologise, to ask for forgiveness from time to time, and a great community spirit. You know, people basically pulling in the same direction.
Hey,why am I not missing the religious groups?

Steve Zara : When music is made "downloadable" in Myspace Music sites, usually that means that people can do what they want with it.
(It just so happens that the "Comet" piece is one of my favourite compositions. Came bounding straight out of little Welsh heart exactly as you hear now.
Even atheists get inspiration from time to time. Weird, huh?
I am taking the necessary steps to protect the copyright of all these pieces, and if ever anything "commercial" happens, all the royalties will go to the RDF.
ALL.
Not a percentage.

327. Fleabytes

Comment #140515 by Richard Morgan on March 7, 2008 at 3:47 pm

mikejswalker

I'll be back to listen to the David Robertson piece!

It's your fault!
There I was, peacefully working on gentle music for people I respect, and you put this evil idea into my head.
And since it's so much easier to be nasty than to be nice....


http://www.myspace.com/fleabytes


WeeFlea : "I'm always right!!!"

328. Fleabytes

Comment #140463 by Richard Morgan on March 7, 2008 at 12:19 pm

Steve Zara

It sounded like something that I would have expected to hear during the Cosmos series.

Thank you, Steve - that is the ultimate compliment.
I don't know what to say...
Guess I'll just keep composing for you guys...

Cartomancer : I'll bear your remarks in mind when I start work on your portrait. Lots of musique concrete - what do you think? With plenty of wobbly bits like Pamela Anderson?
(I love this crazy, never-ending thread!)

329. Fleabytes

Comment #140457 by Richard Morgan on March 7, 2008 at 12:01 pm

I knew it would be gratifying composing stuff for my RD.Net friends. I spend hours writing dots on lines, arranging the orchestration etc, and I realise that it has all been worthwhile when Cartomancer says :

I liked the gunshot sounds toward the end.

That's the sort of stuff that makes me keep coming back here, day after day, month after month, eternity after eternity (too many branes there? Oops, sorry)

330. Fleabytes

Comment #140452 by Richard Morgan on March 7, 2008 at 11:48 am

Update news :
I am working on other musical portraits, but in the meantime I have just posted my musical impression of Hitchens in debate.

Up next:
Paula;
Steve Zara.
Fleabyters.


http://www.myspace.com/fleabytes

331. Fleabytes

Comment #140435 by Richard Morgan on March 7, 2008 at 10:34 am

Bookmark this:


http://www.myspace.com/fleabytes

This is a Music Myspace where I will be regularly adding musical portraits of all the Fleabyte posters.
So - come back regularly.
There is already one portrait plus the music for RD and his daughter comet-watching.

332. Fleabytes

Comment #139899 by Richard Morgan on March 6, 2008 at 4:37 pm

Paula :

You're absolutely right that Dawkins' argument on religion and child abuse has been grossly distorted, but I think his objection goes beyond just the segregation and stereotyping that can occur when children are labelled with the religion of their parents: I understood him to have been arguing that it is an abuse of their right to decide for themselves at an appropriate age; that it is something that is deliberately imposed on them by zealous parents who are unwilling to run the risk of letting them reach their own conclusions on the matter. So I think the accusation is a little stronger than you have expressed it here.

You are right to think that his objection goes beyond just the segregation and stereotyping that can occur when children are labelled with the religion of their parents."
In fact we no longer need to "think" or "understand" his argument, as if their might be a problem of interpretation.
In his debate with Madeileine Bunting he said :

Child abuse : One is labelling children when they're too young to know and the second is things like hell fire, which terrify the daylights out of them.
... Most of these people are not nice people, they are telling children they are going to roast forever in hell!. I CALL THAT CHILD ABUSE.

I hope this puts an end to the "What Richard Dawkins calls "child abuse" debate".

333. Fleabytes

Comment #139656 by Richard Morgan on March 6, 2008 at 10:50 am

Vaal

This thread still going on? Must be a record!

Good threads never die, they simply...
Stop!
Strike that!
I never said that.

334. Fleabytes

Comment #139653 by Richard Morgan on March 6, 2008 at 10:41 am

Steve Z

I think religion can encourage the "it is an aberration" attitude.

Can?
Only "can"?
Or was that a Zaratic understatement?

335. Fleabytes

Comment #139650 by Richard Morgan on March 6, 2008 at 10:30 am

Steve Zara

Sorry to be blunt, but I am fed up with that condescending bullshit.

(Not getting at you in any way, Al)

Ah, cultural differences.
No doubt al-rawandi felt good about the "tolerating homosexuals" thing, just like his need to leap to the defence of slighted (in his opinion) ladies, as if they were the weaker sex who needed his virile gallantry.
I do honestly suspect it is a cultural issue.
But it doesn't stop it being condescending bullshit...

336. Fleabytes

Comment #139645 by Richard Morgan on March 6, 2008 at 10:08 am

Paula

So I guess I'm accepting that religion can provide much-needed emotional support, and that, when it does, this is a good thing. But at the same time, I'm arguing that a) this is no excuse for the truth claims that go with it, b) that religion is not the only way of supplying this emotional support, and c) that religion isn't always as good at this as it likes to think.

"Winning hearts and minds."

"Theists win hearts, atheists win minds." Comment.

Mormon missionaries used to promise "being to sealed to one's loved ones for time AND eternity". In the '70s it was a great selling line. Completely irrational, but great for scoring converts, particularly among the recently bereaved.
I am not saying that our "job" is to offer atheist emotional support, but in my thinking, it remains a nigglingly persistent theme.
(Just as an aside - one of the reasons for my frequent presence on this thread is the joy of that feeling of "being with" people like you, Steve Zara, Brian English and lots of others -if only "virtually" and fleetingly.)
Before anyone else says it - Buddhist-style "spiritual" experiences are of little use in the area of unsatisfied or wounded relationships.
Meditation has been called (not by me) "cerebral masturbation". (Sure, Woody Allen said, "Don't knock masturbation - at least I'm having sex with someone I love," but all the same...)

337. Leaving the Faith

Comment #139634 by Richard Morgan on March 6, 2008 at 9:28 am

MaxD

Seriously I thought they were so obvious as to not need pointing out.

Sorry - I misunderstood. You see, religion leaps into the gaps left by damaged relationships (with family and friends) and I suspect that there are lot more people hurting in that area than not.
There's a lot more to be said about that, but at another time.

Worry about Mr.

I'm afraid I don't understand that. Could you explain please?
And THANK YOU for having had the good idea to come and fetch me on the Fleabytes thread to indicate your post here. Good thinking.

338. The Salamander's Tale

Comment #139549 by Richard Morgan on March 6, 2008 at 4:20 am

PBUM

However, one cannot help emotions getting in the way from time to time.

Tell me about it!

339. Fleabytes

Comment #139536 by Richard Morgan on March 6, 2008 at 3:34 am

Oh fuck!
I have just opened this thread, logged in and started typing as if doing so were a conditioned reflex.
Anybody else have that problem?
Fleabytes thread = interesting stuff = the chance to have a say, plus the "This thread cannot die" instinct.
Paula - I think you're going to have to open a local branch of "Fleabytes Anonymous" as a sort of after-sales service.
Over on another thread, people are scared of death. I have the same problem with the thought that this thread might stop unravelling one day.

340. The Salamander's Tale

Comment #139531 by Richard Morgan on March 6, 2008 at 3:23 am

Mitchell Gliks

I am not projecting the fact that I won't exist any more onto death, that is the fact of the matter. When I die, my existence concludes, that is what scares me

I'm sorry I offended you with what I had hoped to be a few kind words.
Perhaps "all these tired old lines of reasoning" just happen to be right, but you haven't seen that yet.
Your comparing them to screaming carrots tends to make me think that you haven't fully understood the idea of projecting into a vacuum.
Rather like the "fear of the unknown" problem - it's what we know that gives us the Foggy Mountain Quick-Step, not what we ignore.
Try taking Corylus's advice - it will be be much more effective than you could imagine!

341. The Salamander's Tale

Comment #139521 by Richard Morgan on March 6, 2008 at 3:05 am

PBUM

It scares the crap out of me from time to time to think of death.

Which one? The long one before you were born, or the one after this life?
Others may have said this to you before, "since Nature abhors a vacuum", and the notion of "death" is just such a vacuum, that which is scaring the crap out of you (thus worrying the All-Bran producers) is what YOUR mind is putting into this vacuum! Or projecting onto a blank screen. Or whatever.
Death can't scare you any more than God can reassure you. Try to take a look at what YOU are projecting into this word "death", and you'll find that most of the scariness will disappear.
"Being dead is OK.Been there. Done that."
I overcame my vertigo problems and at the same time acquired a "healthy" fear of dying when I did a 90 metre bungee-jump a few years back. Try it. Puts lots of things into a more reasonable perspective.
Or if that seems too scary for the time being, you could start with something just a little less traumatic - an evening with my ex-mother-in-law, for example. Just something to provoke some cathartic sensations.

342. Fleabytes

Comment #139515 by Richard Morgan on March 6, 2008 at 2:54 am

Steve Z

"why does it look like THAT? That is weird!"

How old were you when the question became : "Why do I see it like that?"
I was a precocious child too - I started worrying about questions like that around the age of 47/48!

343. Fleabytes

Comment #139506 by Richard Morgan on March 6, 2008 at 2:31 am

clodhopper

I think some of those personal/psychological needs are still relevant though

Damn you, clodhopper! Once again you have just said what I wanted to say, and you said it better than I would have done!
(Might as well just go down to the pub and gossip with some local celebrities.)

In short, we have 'outgrown' religion. Our infancy is over and we can start having toddler tantrums.

A few years ago I read in some New Age book on the Cabala that humanity was just about entering the stroppy, quarrelsome teenage phase.
Having said that, when you talk about "personal/psychological needs" you have put your finger on an essential detail : we all need love!
We need to feel loved and accepted, and we need to be able to love and accept. This was what drew me into evangelical christianity nearly 40 years ago. I will never forget the impact of the preachers words during an evangelical rally on the Wirral : "Jesus did not come to condemn - he came to SAVE."
Well, at the time, that did it for me. I fell for it hook, line and sinker, and dangled, squirming but hopeful, on the end of the line for over five years!
It seems to me that in many areas, religion has given up on social control, and is trying to calm the toddler tantrums with, "There, there, Mummy loves you."
I am sure that for many, feeling loved and accepted completely eclipses issues such as intelligent design, the young Earth theory and logical fallacies.
And when the human suffering is at its most intense, I can imagine that heliocentrism, flat earth societies or "it's turtles all the way down" seem completely irrelevant.
(Recently when I made a similar remark, some(EDIT)body retorted, "But that doesn't make it true!" Please spare me these cheap, obvious comments.)

When you, clodhopper (a misnomer if ever there was one!) talk about personal/psychological needs, I presume that you are referring to what I would call the whole area of human relationships.
As long as Christianity continues to sell love, forgiveness and acceptance, it will stay in business. And if it has to abandon its grotesque, pseudo-scientific posturing, it will not make a shred of difference to the millions who echo the Beatles' "All you need is love."
(And yes, I do realise I am addressing Western, Judeo-Christian cultural attitudes here, and not virgin-hungry,USA-hating part-time pilots.)
This also explains, perhaps, why there is always a feeling, when Christians talk science, that in the last analysis, there is nothing really at stake for them.

344. Leaving the Faith

Comment #139468 by Richard Morgan on March 5, 2008 at 11:23 pm

MaxD

Family and friends will do very nicely too.

How strange that you mention the most vital factors for "happiness" at the end of your list, like a sort of afterthought.
I find this almost worrying

345. Christopher Hitchens on Real Time with Bill Maher

Comment #139383 by Richard Morgan on March 5, 2008 at 5:13 pm

which is mine and which I thought of.

Will you guys please refrain from ending sentences with propositions!!!!!
This sentence should read: "Which is mine, and which I thought of, ass-hole!!!"

346. Fleabytes

Comment #139382 by Richard Morgan on March 5, 2008 at 5:08 pm

G'night all!

347. Christopher Hitchens on Real Time with Bill Maher

Comment #139378 by Richard Morgan on March 5, 2008 at 5:04 pm

Goldy

That's my theory, it is mine and I thought of it.

In my part of the world, this kind of public confession would be described as an "own goal".

Along the way, of course, there will be changes.

Dilutions?

After a few generations your "animus" will die out totally.

Or will rule the world - according to the principles of homeopathy.

348. Christopher Hitchens on Real Time with Bill Maher

Comment #139363 by Richard Morgan on March 5, 2008 at 4:35 pm

Steve Zara

My tired brain can't deal with it right now.

Use the other one then! Or do you have to get permission from your corpus callosum first?

349. Fleabytes

Comment #139358 by Richard Morgan on March 5, 2008 at 4:27 pm

Steve Zara

The experience seems to be a fundamentally different kind of thing from the mapping.

Pinker's "hard problem" again?

350. Christopher Hitchens on Real Time with Bill Maher

Comment #139350 by Richard Morgan on March 5, 2008 at 4:19 pm

Steve Zara - I was not wrong! Since you are clearly wearing a hat in your avatar photo (unless you have a really serious dandruff problem) I was saying that one wouldn't be meeting you on Ilkla Moor. And that we would be unlikely to find recognisable bits of you (at a molecular level) in a canard a l'orange.