CW: Truth is a property. My efforts to ascertain/measure that property do not change its intrinsic value. This is a fundamental tenet of science without which we cannot even pretend to apply any scientific theories. For example, if I set out to measure the mass of a liter of water at 20°C and arrive at a value of 1.2 kg, does that mean that its true mass is 1.2 kg? No, it means I'm measuring it incorrectly. In other words, I know what I say is true (at least in any reasonable paradigm of thought) based solely on your arguments from the OP (i.e. that you use reason). The alternatives are that you are unreasonable, do not believe in scientific principles, or are trolling. Pick your poison.
Brain scans reveal: Self-proclaimed right-wingers had a more pronounced amigdala - a primitive part of the brain associated with emotion.
It is an almond-shape set of neurons located deep in the brain's medial temporal lobe.
However, those aligned to the left had thicker anterior cingulates - which is an area associated with anticipation and decision-making.
Features of conservative and liberal thinking correspond to the functionality of these different parts of the brain.
Such differences will not change how much a volume of water will weigh, but they change the color of reality, whether you respond to the world as threatening or are able to keep fear out of decision making. It will also determine whether you use intelligence to rationalize away unpleasant ideas that threaten your ego, or face facts openly.
M: http://noosphere.princeton.edu/
Everything I hoped to be true that I had faith was true I destroyed. Then I had to feel the pain I didn't want to feel. I paid quite a price to know nothing.
CW: This is not an assertion that could be made by anyone claiming to be guided by reason. Reason tells us that correlation and causation are not one and the same. I suspect this is the primary reason the site's author was forced to add the disclaimer that this "is not a project of Princeton University" on the front page. You simultaneously mock those who you claim are unable to reason and disbelieve science, then post a link to an unscientific website as proof of your own fringe belief system. In other words, you mock yourself. Let me know when you are able to make a scientifically testable hypothesis which tests Noetic Field Theory. Until then, realize that, by definition, it is not science until it is formulated in a way which is scientifically testable.
M: No assertion was made. I mentioned that I am aware of studies that say random number generators get goofy when big things happen hours before they happen. I have no idea whether it's true or not. I just point to stuff that interests me and from my understanding of your scientific views could not possibly be true. It's again that I know nothing but you know a lot.
Brain scans reveal: Self-proclaimed right-wingers had a more pronounced amigdala - a primitive part of the brain associated with emotion.
It is an almond-shape set of neurons located deep in the brain's medial temporal lobe.
However, those aligned to the left had thicker anterior cingulates - which is an area associated with anticipation and decision-making.
Features of conservative and liberal thinking correspond to the functionality of these different parts of the brain.
Such differences will not change how much a volume of water will weigh, but they change the color of reality, whether you respond to the world as threatening or are able to keep fear out of decision making. It will also determine whether you use intelligence to rationalize away unpleasant ideas that threaten your ego, or face facts openly.
M: http://noosphere.princeton.edu/
Everything I hoped to be true that I had faith was true I destroyed. Then I had to feel the pain I didn't want to feel. I paid quite a price to know nothing.
CW: This is not an assertion that could be made by anyone claiming to be guided by reason. Reason tells us that correlation and causation are not one and the same. I suspect this is the primary reason the site's author was forced to add the disclaimer that this "is not a project of Princeton University" on the front page. You simultaneously mock those who you claim are unable to reason and disbelieve science, then post a link to an unscientific website as proof of your own fringe belief system. In other words, you mock yourself. Let me know when you are able to make a scientifically testable hypothesis which tests Noetic Field Theory. Until then, realize that, by definition, it is not science until it is formulated in a way which is scientifically testable.
M: No assertion was made. I mentioned that I am aware of studies that say random number generators get goofy when big things happen hours before they happen. I have no idea whether it's true or not. I just point to stuff that interests me and from my understanding of your scientific views could not possibly be true. It's again that I know nothing but you know a lot.