Western christianity favours an Aristotle interpretation more – one which may have to do very little with what he actually said – not conveyed, but said!

Aristotle is – by a long and strong tradition – prisoner of a sort of metaphysics which he never dreamed of. This is the result of an interpretation of some of his texts not much later in the Peripatos, but mostly by the fathers and in Middle Ages. In that periode such an interpretation was a good one because it stood in connection with everyday life. But now, in the 20th and 21th century we must be aware of the incongruitiy and the ideologic distortion of this interpretation. If we read the text in Greek, not in English, German or otherwise, the fact will be obvious. Most of these translations, as good as they may be, are profoundly imbued with the tradition, the mentality, the conceptions of the Middle Ages.
Seeing this, I set myself the target to deliver the prisoner …

– Erwin Sonderegger

Posted by: persiflo | Feb 24 2024 17:05 utc | 204

Posted by: persiflo | Feb 24 2024 17:05 utc | 205
I say the same about Plato, persiflo, but there have been good translations to be found that can be relied upon for both, especially if they explain alternative meanings in footnotes. Aristotle is more direct than Plato, but I don’t see quotations from Aristotle in your post so I’m not sure your point is demonstrated.
I did go to the site you linked, and it is impressively presented, much scholarship there. I just scrolled through the presentations on the opening page, found one that I will put here as a quote on Plato I found interesting:

“Different reasons give rise to the question, what philosophy really is, and by tradition we know many answers. Plato’s answer can be found by examining his explicit statements about philosophy in his dialogues, or by analyzing his representation of Socrates – philosophy become flesh. But another way to find an answer to the question lies in examining the things which – according to Plato – we cannot do without. There are three of them, namely the idea, logos and aporia. These three taken together – the insight that we orient ourselves according to some unity in our different fields of life; that we cannot dismiss dialogue and debate; and questions outlive answers – paint a picture of philosophy as «unbehauptendes Denken»1 [undogmatic thought]. Such «unbehauptendes Denken» does not aim to insist on new claims against old ones, but instead seeks to analyze and to reflect upon old views.“

I like the part I’ve bolded very much. I would say that is a better definition than others. However, it still seeks to explain logically what Plato keeps within himself, which is to be found in the expression “Know thyself”, something the student discovers as he/she reads a dialogue and works through it. I am not sure that ‘three things’ actually describe that experience, but I’ll give him credit for approaching Plato the right way!

Posted by: juliania | Feb 24 2024 18:24 utc | 206

Citation errata
Editor – Robert McGillivray.
Performed by: The Arrogant Worms.
Video by: Scottishrob13
The song is “The War of 1812” by Three Dead Trolls in a Baggie.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Feb 24 2024 19:30 utc | 208

“I still think she could come across as less dogmatic and doctrinaire. Perhaps she thinks ‘the enemy’ (the GM lobby, the industrialized agriculturalists) warrants it, and they do the same from the other direction?”
Posted by: Ron | Feb 23 2024 5:31 utc | 103
Are you kidding? They would happily have her whacked if she becomes too annoying.
One of the most courageous people I’ve encountered on the web is Whitney Webb who reports on subjects such as Epstein and related corruption.
Her courage is incredible and I hope she take steps to protect herself going forward.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Feb 24 2024 20:02 utc | 210

Posted by: Ron | Feb 23 2024 5:10 utc | 100 (speaking on criminal demographics and illegal immigration)
————
A rotting corpse attracts flies.
Posted by: Passerby | Feb 23 2024 7:52 utc | 110
————-
LOL, a drive-by hit from you, Passerby!
Posted by: Ron | Feb 23 2024 8:46 utc | 114
————-
Gee that’s really gross assuming America’s dead corpse is attracting flies. It’s not dead yet.
Don’t you know that all shithole countries have that problem?

Posted by: David G Horsman | Feb 24 2024 20:17 utc | 212

re David Horsman above with the question on the “error of overextension” — let me say two quick points.
1 – The concepts of philosophy are almost always neither generic nor general, but highly specific of the language that’s used, and the historical and cultural context in which some debate is taking place – up to and including those of the actual philosopher trying to make sense of an earlier one. In that regard, what you describe comes off as ignorance of the subtleties that are inherent to the material – BUT . . .
2 – The 2,500 years on the record of the european tradition is a history of failure at being completely, very, or (as is it stands) even somewhat right about things. So your approach of skimming the material to get some overview, without getting stuck or lost in it, and all the while minding about your own reasons and questions towards the field, is very much the sensible thing to do.
For some personal reasons that I can’t fathom myself I became a nerd in the field, debate and argument are most enjoyable pastimes for me, and of course I love being right and try to do so all the time, much like a sports guy would do. To the luck of all those around me, I’m not very deadly serious about it, and fully subscribe to the famous quib, “A philosopher’s foremost virtue is to be able to ridicule themselves!”
I also always assume that the “big questions” should be at least of some interest to everyone, that’s why I am quick to offer my views, sometimes overeagerly so without realizing it. So, thank you for the question!

Posted by: persiflo | Feb 24 2024 20:43 utc | 214

“AI futures and the metacrisis. AU
59:42 / 1:15:27
The Metacrisis: Making Sense in a Nonsensical World
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aKI2C61jVE&t=1682s
Daniel Schmachtenberger …. Imagining what must the future coordination systems and the distribution and allocation of resources and you start to get into things …
The discussion then moves onto the potential of positives from AI/AGI to individuals/society and culture
Posted by: Lavrov’s Dog | Feb 24 2024 2:18 utc | 184
I really enjoyed that. I must get more information on these people. Daniel displays some very clear thinking. He has the outline of solutions even though he Lacks any Vision on how to implement them.
Anyone that doesn’t know about the failure of the commons should listen to this video, it’s like the 2024 version of something I read in the late seventies.
Yes I’ve given this quite a bit of thought.
Peace, Democracy, and Freedom in that Order.
I’m not sure how you should order that, please note the caps. Because at that point it’s an ideology.
And yes an artificial intelligence that won’t kill us as part of that solution. Or it will. But there’s a bigger problem.
What do you think you would discover if you had true democracy. And like all democracies, it depends on how that is implemented.
But by definition, and statistically, 50% of the human population are rather undemocratic if they aren’t outright fascist. You can have a fascist democracy. Why we have the best one in the Middle East and the only one. LOL
And I asked myself, assuming I had the prerequisite several million, we’re a successful what kind of monster would I unleash upon humanity? I could certainly assume the title of the most hated human on earth. That comes with the territory.
There’s other really critical problems alluded to in the video. I generally reduce that to corruption and gaming the system. Although the system could buy its design be either fatally flawed or authoritarian in a nasty way.
At a minimum, you would need a good internet connection, $3 million, and a hidden cave about a hundred feet below surface. Just cuz.
The first artificial general intelligence is going to be used for military purposes not economic ones. Both. It might do that’s a bigger problem than global warming. I know how horrible it sounds but a nuclear war might be preferable.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Feb 24 2024 22:06 utc | 216

This promises to be an interesting read. I have started it and decided to share it here as many barflies would be interested in the content. It’s a long article so there is just the intro and some interesting tidbit from the middle to motivate the read.
source: https://journals.uni-lj.si/as/article/download/14879/15266/54420
—
An Introduction to Zoeontology
Fei WU, Department of Philosophy, Peking University.
Zoeontology (性命論), or the study of living, is a philosophical system I am at- tempting to construct in the spirit of traditional Chinese philosophy.1 Since 2018, amidst heated discussions about the main spirit of Chinese philosophy as well as its modern form (Ding 2018; 2020; Yang 2020), I have published several articles in Chinese on zoeontology (Wu, 2018; 2020a; 2020b; 2022). I am now writing a book on this system in Chinese, and am delighted to introduce its main ideas here in the following English text.
Living as a Philosophical Question
The central concern of zoeontology is to understand contemporary questions from a Chinese point of view. There have been rich philosophical ideas in Chi- na, but seldom have they been organized in a systematic way. The encounter with Western philosophy, especially in recent four decades, has taught Chinese philos- ophers to organize these ideas in at least three aspects. 1) the systematic form of Western philosophy has offered a model to organize philosophical ideas; 2) the central concerns of Western philosophy have stimulated Chinese philosophers to identify the major features of our own philosophy, especially those which are dif- ferent from the major features of the Western traditions; 3) the major problems that modern Western philosophers have been struggling with are also impor- tant to Chinese philosophers. Both Western and Chinese philosophies have been concerned with similar central issues for human beings, but in different ways. While contemplating such pan-human questions from a Chinese point of view, we might offer some new insights on them for Western audiences in particular.
In the Western philosophical tradition ontology, or the study of being, is seen as the first philosophy. Shakespeare’s famous line “to be or not to be, that is the ques- tion”, could best describe the central concern of the major Western philosophers. The real concern of Hamlet, however, is whether he should live or not. From a Chinese perspective, we would say, “to live or not to live, that is the question”, and this is exactly how the main Chinese translations of Hamlet render it, as it would be unreadable if we literally translated “to be” as 存在. There have been intensive debates about the Chinese counterpart of the term “being” in philosophical texts. “Being” seems to be so simple a word that we could use it to describe philosophi- cal objects in any cultural tradition. But there is a long intellectual history behind this simple word which Chinese philosophy does not share, and how could we use a term without considering the rich cultural assumptions underlying it? Because there is no copula in Chinese there can be no exact counterpart of “being”. The major question of Chinese philosophy is not being, but living.
Although the term being seems suitable to describe everything in the world in everyday language, whether in Greek, English, or any modern European language, as a philosophical term originally discovered by Parmenides, being does not signi- fy anything that exists in the world. It is eternal and unchangeable. Plato inherited and developed the Parmenidean understanding of being. In The Republic, he fa- mously defined a philosopher as someone who studied “the being that is eternally and does not wander between generation and decaying” ( ἐκείνης τῆς οὐσίας τῆς ἀεὶ οὔσης καὶ μὴ πλανωμένης ὑπὸ γενέσεως καὶ φθορᾶς) (Plato 2016, 485b2). For Plato, anything that generates, changes, and decays is becoming instead of being. Only the idea (εἶδος) really is, and everything else only exists in a rough sense. Ar- istotle, who defined a philosopher as one who studies being qua being (Aristotle 1979, 1005b24), made more compromises with the everyday use of the word and agreed that everything that exists is, and that being must change (ibid., 1012b28). As a philosophical inquiry, however, the primary concern of being qua being is form or actuality, which is neither generated nor destroyed (ibid., 1043b17), nor moveable (ibid., 1067b10). What is more, for him there must be a prime mover to make the world run, and this prime mover is an eternal being. Hence the idea of eternity or immovability is still inherent to his philosophical concern with being.
…
The idea of immortality is very important among Chinese intellectuals. There is a famous discussion in Zuo Zhuan about three immortalities (三不朽): by virtue, by achievement, and by words (Ruan 2021, vol. 18, 1614). There was no discussion about the imperishable nature of a spiritual being, as in Plato’s Phaedo. It was only after Buddhism was introduced into China that the idea of an immortal spirit became familiar among Chinese intellectuals. In his famous discussion with Bud- dhist scholars, Fan Zhen, a fifth century Confucian scholar, argued powerfully that spirit, as a part of the body, could not survive the body (神滅論). Fan Zhen represented the mainstream idea of Confucianism, and this is also the idea of zo- eontology. The three immortalities depend on a belief in continuous history. Only on the condition that the historical record is always right and complete could people believe that their virtues, deeds, or words would be remembered forever. Among Chinese intellectuals, there is a common practice of “entrusting immor- tality” (托以不朽). When someone was about to die, he entrusted his immortality to a trusted friend …
—-
source: https://journals.uni-lj.si/as/article/download/14879/15266/54420

Posted by: sunof27 | Feb 25 2024 0:31 utc | 218

Here in Vic Australia, the state government has banned natural gas installations in new homes. My mate has an app on his phone that show what capacity different power stations are running at including alternative. At the coal fired plants, all units unless they are stopped for standard maintenance constantly run at full capacity, alternative power anywhere up to 75% but average average 50% or less.
Madness.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Feb 25 2024 1:37 utc | 220

@Posted by: Peter AU1 | Feb 25 2024 1:28 utc | 220
So you know better than the British Antarctic Survey? From one of their latest reports:

Antarctic ice cores show us that the concentration of CO2 was stable over the last millennium until the early 19th century. It then started to rise, and its concentration is now nearly 50% higher than it was before the industrial revolution (Fig. 2). Other measurements that can fingerprint the source of this CO2 (e.g. isotopic data) confirm that the increase must be due to emissions from fossil fuel usage and human-induced changes vegetation and soils. Measurements from older ice cores (discussed below) confirm that both the magnitude and rate of the recent increase are almost certainly unprecedented over the last 800,000 years (Fig. 2). The fastest natural increase measured in older ice cores is around 15ppm (parts per million) over about 200 years. For comparison, atmospheric CO2 is now rising 15ppm every 6 years. Methane (CH4), another important greenhouse gas, also shows an unprecedented increase in concentration over the last two centuries. Its concentration is now much more than double its pre-industrial level. This is mainly due to emissions from agricultural sources and fossil fuel production, that comes on top of natural emissions from wetlands and other sources.

Ice cores and climate change
There is nothing in the ice cores that show anywhere near the rate of atmospheric CO2 increase for the last 800,000 years; currently 15ppm every 6 years vs the previous fastest rate of 15 ppm over 200 years. The ice cores also allow measurements of atmospheric methane, also showing an unprecedented (in the last 800,000) rate of rise. Atmospheric CO2 and methane are easily the predominant drivers of climate change. Water vapour is a dependent variable and positive feedback, the warmer a column of air is the more water vapour it will hold. The relationship is well known so it can be modelled.
The real unknowns are cloud formation, which is incredibly difficult to model, but it does seem that there is a “flip” point where the nature of clouds change producing a significant relatively fast feedback. Then there is also sea ice coverage which a dependent variable, with the loss of sea ice leading to much larger amounts of solar radiation being taken in rather than reflected out.
Climate scientists also have other markers from frozen plants, mud cores etc. that have been used to back up the ice core findings. Historical global temperature can also be deduced from such things.
There is a wonderful and inexpensive book written about the Greenland Ice Cores by Richard B. Alley The Two-Mile Time Machine: Ice Cores, Abrupt Climate Change, and Our Future – Updated Edition
The PETM is a great period to understand as being a possible pointer to the present, although even then GHG levels rose a lot slower. There is an upcoming again inexpensive book on this (April) from Steven Earle and he has already published A Brief History of the Earth’s Climate: Everyone’s Guide to The Science of Climate Change

Posted by: Roger | Feb 25 2024 2:19 utc | 222

Oh. If err… local laws don’t prohibit it you encase the storage in phosphorous. It literally takes that level of destruction. However, it shouldn’t matter given that, like TOR (The Onion Router), only the receiver can decrypt the message and intermediaries don’t have the ultimate destination.
While TOR like networks are subject to network analysis attacks to identify users, this system, being different from a VPN, has no record of traffic except in terms of a single device.
Depending on security, messages can also be broken out into widely dispersed packets so as to avoid any correlation on size/length/type.
There are open source version of android out there. Some privacy oriented. That’s your FOSS entry point available at most stores in the G20. Their main limitation is they lack the proprietary software that handles cell phone communications. However, I hope it’s clear that it should be incapable of pinging a cell tower, STINGRAY spoofing tower, random restaurants or anything else without permission.
Sure… ordering a pizza’s going to be a bitch but the upside is more than worth it. Survival.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Feb 25 2024 2:35 utc | 224

So I think we were discussing the dangers of open source technology. Philosophy, global warming and stuff. I’m having a little too much fun me thinks.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Feb 25 2024 2:42 utc | 226

On a lighter note, I basically designed the online part of what I do in a somewhat Whimsical way.
I have now let Scott Ritter know it’s entirely his fault that I had to release this technology to the resistance at this time. Had he not publicly disclosed the existence of The Rock this would have never happened.
If only I had a working copy I could blame him for that too. However the development time can be measured in months depending on the team.
Way to go Scott. Just look at what you’ve done!

Posted by: David G Horsman | Feb 25 2024 3:58 utc | 228

Roger | Feb 25 2024 2:19 utc | 223 “There is nothing in the ice cores that show anywhere near the rate of atmospheric CO2 increase for the last 800,000 years;”
?

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Feb 25 2024 4:23 utc | 230

Posted by: persiflo | Feb 23 2024 19:41 utc | 172
What’s true of mathematics carries forward to science, since mathematics (and currently, the formalized mathematics of the twentieth century onwards) is the ‘language of science’… But this doesn’t mean that science and mathematics aren’t helpful in some aspects of our lives… about one-twelfth (grin). But some of these are very important and very useful, and I couldn’t post these message without them.
I’ve just read Wolfgang Smith’s book _Physics and Vertical Causation_… while I’m not an expert on these matters, I like his conclusion that what Quantum Physics has done has rediscovered Aristotle’s ‘potentiae’… and through its limitations (as the ultimate physics) it has revealed the importance of ‘causation from wholeness’, which is not mechanistic and perhaps ‘analytically’ quite intractable, even in the physical realm.
https://philos-sophia.org/vertical-causation-wholeness/
(This links somewhat to an earlier post of sunof27)
Cheers,
Ron
Cheers, Ron

Posted by: Ron | Feb 25 2024 5:09 utc | 232

Israeli attack on an iranian gas pipeline ?????
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/2/21/iran-says-israel-behind-attacks-on-gas-pipelines
Posted by: WMG | Feb 25 2024 5:16 utc | 234
This seems to confirm Alastair Crooke’s notion that the war in the Middle East is already spreading beyond Israel. That there is more escaltion in the Middle East.

Posted by: WMG | Feb 25 2024 5:19 utc | 234

Posted by: sunof27 | Feb 25 2024 0:31 utc | 219
Thanks. Will take the time to read in next few days. About being versus living:
Language: Living connotes the daily grind, the personal life journey; I think ‘being alive’ is better.
Being involves the eternity issue, no?
Eternity in Time much easier to explore versus non-location viz Space.
Time: we imagine different ‘moments’ in past, present and future time. But consider: no matter how short the period between moments, it can always be halved ad infinitum (an asymptote).
Contemplating this deeply reveals that ultimately there is no duration to a moment. In the dimension of Time, that which is without duration is Eternal, thus not subject to birth and death.
That is abstract. Then the actual experience of eternity in meditation can be called Nowness.
Nowness experience comes with luminosity-brightness which is awareness of being awake (vipashyana), also the experiential meaning of ‘Buddha’.
Like eternity viz (non-existent) moments, Buddha / wakefulness / nowness is not affected by mental contents, just as Being is not subject to birth and death.
Later it can be understood that eternal Being is all that is truly Real and seeming relative existence of being alive, being a Self, is a cognitive construct, thus non truly existent. But that’s another dimension. I just wanted to point out that eternity can be easily approached by deconstructing Moments in Time to realize that there is no such thing, and this relation between Moments versus Eternity (nowness) is similar to that between being alive (ignorant) versus Being (Awake-Buddha-Immortal).
BTW, all this relates to the Buddhist ‘Two Truths’: Relative and Absolute, also Nagarjuna’s Madhyamika.

Posted by: Scorpion | Feb 25 2024 5:37 utc | 236

Posted by: Ron | Feb 25 2024 4:46 utc | 232
Hi ron, sometime you should look into the solved mystery of the Mayan soils in South America. Highly quality soil that retains its nutrients.
I ended up doing quite a bit of research into the use of biochar to enhance poverty soils. It turns out that the proper use of animals like goats can contribute to this also. And of course plantings and techniques that retain soil.
There is lots of talk about how climate change will open up colder climates but very little discussion about how poor the soil quality tends to be.
So I’m interested, I guess like a lot of the rest of the world, and how to increase soil quality and resilience at scale.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Feb 25 2024 6:53 utc | 238

“Are we intelligent cattle to be corralled and managed OR are we uniquely human imbued with essential autonomy and spirit?”
Posted by: simon crow | Feb 25 2024 5:20 utc | 236
I guess you didn’t get the memo. We are chimpanzees that incidentally and coincidentally can talk. Make of that what you will.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Feb 25 2024 6:58 utc | 240

“since my ‘answer’ came before your question. I think Sondereggar covers it pretty well, don’t you?
Posted by: juliania | Feb 25 2024 6:21 utc | 238
Thank you Juliania. I saw the discussion going on in the comments and jumped right in without thinking to backtrack. Luckily I have time this weekend and will restart at the beginning.
Wikoganda had this bio:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katherine_Sonderegger
” In 2015, Sonderegger published her second book, The Doctrine of God, the first in a planned multi-volume systematic theology. Her project will focus on the unity of God in contrast to what she sees as the overemphasis of contemporary Christian theology on the Trinity.[3] It also emphasizes that systematic theology should be undergirded by the Christian Bible.[4] In 2020, she published her second book, The Doctrine of the Holy Trinity: Processions and Persons. She is currently at work on the third volume, Divine Missions, Christology, and Pneumatology.”
I should mention that I was about to correct your spelling of Schrodinger. It wasn’t precisely clear to me what an undead zombie cat in a box had to do with the current discussion… it’s not that physics and metaphysics can’t coexist with each other, but who really wants a discussion about a potentially dead cat?
Do the smell test, that’s what Mom always told me about that funny looking stuff in the fridge. And truly, asking a physicist to make sense out of anything is really just asking for it.
But if we could put this physics thing to bed and get back to philosophy, do I believe in string theory? No, I’m a frayed knot.
I shall return having being slightly more enlightened by your earlier discussions. Thanks.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Feb 25 2024 7:31 utc | 242

…British Antarctic Survey then feel free to communicate your concerns directly with them.
Posted by: Roger | Feb 25 2024 6:56 utc | 240
Dear British Antarctic Survey,
The next time you limey bastards serve mushy peas for dinner on an expedition we’re going to abandon you.
For sure you will make some polar bear a tasty snack if the scurvy doesn’t get you first.
Sincerely,
You’re disgruntled yet esteemed and generally more intelligent colleagues from the Canadian team.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Feb 25 2024 7:40 utc | 244

“There is a perfectly simple explanation for parapsychological phenomena but it is just too wild to be believed and needs to be understood by experience. But once you understand what is happening it all makes perfect sense. Ancients hinted at it by a somewhat misleading device of ‘microcosom’ …”
Posted by: sunof27 | Feb 22 2024 18:08 utc | 14
My BS detector went off like a three alarm fire there. Is it really too Wild to be believed? I doubt it.
Can only be understood by experiencing it? I doubt that too, that is invariably not the case.
One possible explanation for telepathy and certain paranormal phenomena is an unidentified sensory organ that works on principles of quantum entanglement.
For example, we never knew how birds were able to have a compass sense when migrating north or south but they did and we did figure out how. Without the use of either mysticism nor Quantum effects.
Now if what you have to offer is absurd then your statement makes sense. Otherwise it does not and seems like ducking and explanation.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Feb 25 2024 8:10 utc | 246

Big Pete’s been doing some science homework. 🙂
@ Posted by: Peter AU1 | Feb 25 2024 1:28 utc | 220

BP – I have been studying a lot of ice core charts … (some/many not involved ‘revise the data’).
LD – How did they revise that data Pete? Why? How do you know? Where are your references that show the data was revised and why it was revised Pete?
Climate science is all open source – why aren’t you showing yours Pete? Show your work and your sources.
BP – ….. prior to man made greenhouse emissions, greenhouse gases were not the driver of climate change. Something else drove temperature change, greenhouse gasses increasing and decreasing with temperature.
LD – And what was that / those Driver/s Pete? And Pete GHGs were a major driver of global warming and climate change long before the modern period. Keep studying the subject. You’ll get there. 🙂
BP – What is required is a chart that shows total greenhouse effect.
LD – Who says so? ( not you, you’re just the amateur ‘student’ here). So please show the scientific study reporting on this that such a CHART is required.
BP – Water vapor in the air provides far more greenhouse effect than CO2 then there is the minor gases.
LD – Excellent. You learnt something. You know ALL the climate scientists and Ice Core experts already know this, right? They know what has changed is the CO2 and GHG levels in modern times and it is that which is driving the warming – and not the water vapour itself. Not the insolation. Not the earths orbit or inclination.
BP – Obviously adding more green house gas to the atmosphere will increase greenhouse gas effect to a larger or smaller extent, [ YES !!! ] but what is required to asses it accurately is a chart that shows total greenhouse effect of the earths atmosphere to see how much change is caused by increase in CO2 by man. I cannot find that anywhere.
LD – But why of why do you think it is required Pete, this the problem question here? You already showed in bold what has changed and what needs to be measured and/or forecast into the future.
BP – The holecene, 10,000 years now, is an anomaly in history. What caused it?
LD – Nothing “caused” it. Ask Britannica https://www.britannica.com/science/Holocene-Epoch
BP – What is required is change to total greenhouse effect that is caused by emissions. [ YES !!! ] Change to total greenhouse effect might be twenty percent. It might be one percent. With that temperature increase can be calculated. [ YES !!! ] If that does not match measured temperature increase then we have to look at other factors as well.
LD – I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but this was done decades ago Pete. Remember you are the ‘student’ not the resident professor of climate science. OK? A little humility, crawl before trying to run. This is exactly what climate scientists are doing and have been doing for decades already. 🙂
BP – The German greens, greening everything till they decided war with Russia was more fun… then its cut off the gas, bulldoze the windmills and dig coal…
LD – Mate, mate, Pete, that’s not climate science nor ice core science. 🙂
Keep up the study though. That’s the first step to learning.

Additional Resources for further study:
The Holocene is the name given to the last 11,700 years* of the Earth’s history — the time since the end of the last major glacial epoch, or “ice age.” Since then, there have been small-scale climate shifts — notably the “Little Ice Age” between about 1200 and 1700 A.D. — but in general, the Holocene has been a relatively warm period in between ice ages.
https://ucmp.berkeley.edu/quaternary/holocene.php
https://www.antarcticglaciers.org/glaciers-and-climate/ice-cores/ice-core-basics/
The World Data Service (WDS) for Paleoclimatology maintains archives of ice core data from polar and low-latitude mountain glaciers and ice caps throughout the world. Proxy climate indicators include oxygen isotopes, methane concentrations, dust content, and many other parameters.
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/products/paleoclimatology/ice-core
Exploring Paleoclimate Data
Grade Level High School
https://scied.ucar.edu/activity/oxygen-18-and-ice-core-graphing
This graph shows 110,000 years of temperature derived from the Greenland ice core modeled here, called GISP2. For most of this time, Earth was in an ice age. Greenland climate was much colder than today, but subject to rapid climate swings. The last 10,000 years, however, have been marked by relative warmth and stability. High-resolution records from GISP2 and other ice cores enable scientists to study past climate in detail.
https://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/permanent/planet-earth/what-causes-climate-and-climate-change/what-ice-cores-record
The farther backward you can look, the farther forward you are likely to see.
~ Winston Churchill
Homo sapiens appeared in our present form about 200,000 years ago. Human civilization emerged about 12,000 years ago. (The Holocene 11,700 years ago) The study of past CO2 levels and climates helps us understand the conditions in which human societies developed. This ‘paleoclimate’ information offers important lessons for understanding sustainability and the range of climatic conditions that HUMAN SOCIETIES are known to be suited for.
https://www.co2.earth/co2-ice-core-data
VERY USEFUL
NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory – Earth System Research Laboratories
The Carbon Cycle Greenhouse Gases (CCGG) research area operates the Global Greenhouse Gas Reference Network, measuring the atmospheric distribution and trends of the three main long-term drivers of climate change, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O), as well as carbon monoxide (CO) which is an important indicator of air pollution.
https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/
DATA – https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/data/index.html

Posted by: Lavrov’s Dog | Feb 25 2024 8:11 utc | 248

Roger | Feb 25 2024 6:56 utc | 240
No change in 800,000 years?…. as in net change? What are you talking about here?

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Feb 25 2024 8:59 utc | 250

I went back to check ice core charts again for CO2. GRIP, North GRIP, East GRIP and one other in Greenland, Vostoc and Dome C in Antarctica. All I could find was Vostok re CO2. Searched for them by the name of the could and nothing turned up. What I was looking at the other day I’m not sure.
Vostock https://blogs.agu.org/wildwildscience/files/2010/07/vostok1.jpg
Difficult to tell at that scale but it shows CO2 starting to rise halfway into the holocene or earlier.
Its odd that I cant just put in the name of any of those ice cores and bring up the CO2 chart for them.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Feb 25 2024 9:27 utc | 252

Its odd that I cant just put in the name of any of those ice cores and bring up the CO2 chart for them.
Posted by: Peter AU1 | Feb 25 2024 9:27 utc | 253
No it’s not odd. The internet and computers are problematic technology. So is learning how to use a website to get the results you want. Not odd. Normal. That and you are accessing a Blogsite section – it adhoc, not a specially designed DATABASE 🙂
https://blogs.agu.org/wildwildscience/

Posted by: Lavrov’s Dog | Feb 25 2024 9:41 utc | 254

Posted by: UWDude | Feb 25 2024 9:29 utc | 254
I have pondered, but never really could accept there is a single, base unit of time.
———–
Yeah, the real issue is units of time, arbitrarily small, and ‘instantaneous’… this is what interested me in such conceptions as Wolfgang Smith’s ‘Vertical Causation’:
“Vertical causality made its appearance in the context of the measuring problem in quantum mechanics, where it could be identified by the fact that it acts “instantaneously.”1 Whereas the previously known modes of causation—subsequently referred to as “horizontal”—operate in time by way of a transmission through space, vertical causality operates directly, without the mediation of any such process. That “instantaneity” or lack of process came thus to be taken, in effect, as the defining characteristic of vertical causality…”
https://philos-sophia.org/vertical-causation-wholeness/

Posted by: Ron | Feb 25 2024 9:57 utc | 256

juliania | Feb 25 2024 6:21 utc | 238
I think it was you that I wanted to ask a question but it’s certainly open to the bar. I should preface this by saying that I’m somewhat familiar with the numerous deconstructions of the arguments of Jordan Peterson from Canada.
He’s quite a controversial professor and ex practicing clinical psychologist that gained Fame for opposing Canada’s compelled speech laws where gender is concerned.
Why yes you might, and many do, describe Jordan Peterson as Canada’s Noam Chomsky, and if you knew Jordan that give you a pretty good assessment of Canada’s intellectual mite.
I’m just roasting it Professor Peterson, he is an interesting man of integrity and has my respect regardless of our views.
However what I wanted to discuss was his take, and my crude understanding of it, on religion.
Peterson makes it very clear that this is merely a rough Theory and strong suspicion of his regarding religion. And it’s gained some traction being discussed in theology circles it appears.
So is Siri is that although religions may have harmful rules and do harmful things to individuals, imbalance they are stronger unit than other social structures that existed.
And so it’s partly biological, that this imparted a survival advantage to human groups that had religions over those that did not.
While I would strongly argue, and many have, that religion is not a prerequisite to having a moral and strong Society. However a tightly cohesive group is still going to have the advantage over Loosely based organizations and alliances.
And that’s not to say that that is the entire story. For there are underlying symbology of both a patriarchal and matriarchal nature to be found. Just as the authority and family model reflects societal fascism. Did we see the influence of the family model reflected in religion as well.
So I guess by this point it’s obvious that I think Peterson is really on to something here, it’s not that his critics are incorrect on what they point out but that they Miss or dismiss the broader point.
I should mention too that I’ve seen many occasions where Professor Peterson communicates very poorly. And I would add there were underlying health reasons that might account for that at the time.
It’s kind of like Chomsky. People here rightly comment about moving on from his views in his time has passed. Particularly what happened with covid.
However people here might not know or forget that Chomsky is the man that created modern linguistics.
Having established that statistically driven early science he then provided a loose conceptualization of what work should follow and what questions needed answering. He carefully outlined the scientific methodology that was required for the task. In many respects we are just now accomplishing what he laid out although there were many contemporaries that could fill in a lot of the question marks for him 10 years ago.
and the difference is amongst scientific methodologies. How they tend to manifest in sequence historically within a domain. What his system represented and as I mentioned what was required to solve the problem of human linguistics.
Were you to go back 10 years, and Chomsky made a statement regarding geopolitics, you could pretty well assume he could prove it and it was up to you to prove otherwise.
People get old. You get so you’re constantly in a state of pain and feeling pretty miserable. And then along comes some virus to kill you off at your comfortable end of life. I saw all sorts of people I have a great deal of respect for lose their rationality to fear of the covid virus. I’m not going to judge the man just yet.
The whole point of that siop was to use fear, the Ultimate Weapon, to impose control.
You know it’s like being a lab rat or a cow. Some Lab Rats know they’re a lab rat, most don’t see it coming.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Feb 25 2024 10:55 utc | 258

Scott Ritter on US Tour of Duty
https://www.youtube.com/live/HfHmehZADEg?si=CmHw6RNZ59pPE43H
Comment:
@flaziz 1d ago (edited)
“As a Pakistani, it’s hilarious
to see our US backed military
establishment pulling all kinds
of silly ploys to prevent Imran
Khan from coming to power. Our
military which used to enjoy deep
affection among the masses just
very recently, have completely lost
credibility. You won’t believe the
kind of resentment and hostility
there is for these US backed
Pakistan army generals.”
I have been wondering about that and was not seeing the comments of our bar members on it.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Feb 25 2024 11:44 utc | 260

Posted by: Ron | Feb 25 2024 5:09 utc | 233
My sense of Kauffman’s thinking is that primary driver for him, as he makes explicit in the title, is addressing the possibility of choice for the embodied mind in a mechanical universe. The “poised realm” regime maintains causality but provides for ‘disconnected’ time-space activity regions of full determinism by extending the modalities of the ‘mechanical regimes’. These ‘jumps’ then are due to ‘choices’ by ‘minds’ at the most aware level. So definitely a step up from windup monkeys with no (true) freewill of the materialist.
I have to read the link you provided — looks interesting. There is entire notion of ‘al-Qaib’ in Islam — the ‘un-Seen Realm’ (not to be confused with al-Batin, “the hidden”)– that posits there exists aspects of the Real that can never (ever) be ‘seen’ in the broadest sense by any other than the Supreme Eye of Unity, The One, that is the vision afforded only to God Holy and Exalted. (The ‘hidden” matter may be hidden from some and revealed to other eyes ..)
The matter of “instantaneity” and action on matter is itself mentioned in the Qur’an [Sura 27 : Sign 40]:
https://previous.quran.com/27:40
So it is about the action of the mind — thought — affecting perceived material reality (in this case many minds of the present assembly of king-prophet Soleimaan/Solomon (as)) and in context of “wholeness” that inevitably leads to the Supreme Mind – the Unified Mind that is All Seeing All Aware All Knowing All Capable of affecting its Will (all names of God btw).

Posted by: sunof27 | Feb 25 2024 13:00 utc | 262

Posted by: Scorpion | Feb 25 2024 5:37 utc | 237
Recommend giving it a serious read. It is a gem imo and the author’s spirit is upright, humane and high minded. We can discuss and share thoughts on it after you’ve read it. I’ve found a few fundamental areas that necessitate a response. If this represents the consensus of Chinese ‘holistic’ thinking, then we can also find in the text some sense of how China would behave as an actively engaged global superpower. I won’t spoil that for you, but something close to R2P is in this philosophy as outlined.

Posted by: sunof27 | Feb 25 2024 13:36 utc | 264

Posted by: sunof27 | Feb 25 2024 13:36 utc | 265
Well I did read it, finding some passages easy and others very hard, all to do with linguistics.
I decided years ago, rightly or wrongly, not to go deep into Chinese studies because that would require learning the language, both spoken and written, which of course is pictographic-based and thus fundamentally different from our own. For this reason, translation, unless of technical-practical issues, is tricky, especially dealing with concepts from earlier eras with very different mindsets.
For example, I still have problems with the author’s use of (small-cap) ‘living’. I don’t think it works well in English – or at least not for me. (Maybe ‘Life’ would be better but…) And there are several terms like that.
Some of the Conclusion:

Conclusion
…Zoeontology sees living as the most important thing, but one should not weigh one’s own life as above everything else, because the state of nature is not a condition of all against all, but a natural living community. At least parents are not against their children. The community is not an artificial thing, but a precondition for all human life. Hence one is obliged not only to protect one’s own life, but also the living order of the community. In a family, a responsible person should protect the living order of all family members; in a country, one is responsible for the living order of all citizens; in a world, one is responsible for the living order of all human beings. A civilized person is not one who has denounced nature, but one who not only weighs nature in his own person, but also in the living community.
The greatest difficulties in today’s world are due to cultural misunderstandings and political clashes. We have experienced some serious human disasters in recent centuries, and are very close to new ones. I see all these disasters rooted in the ontological understanding of history, which has sacralized wars and massacres as something above human nature and everyday life. From a zoeontological perspective, however, everything in human civilizations is created for the sake of living.
Originating from Confucianism, zoeontology does not see anything besides living as sacred. Living is the measure of everything, and human beings should not sacrifice human lives for anything else.
Presented above are some brief zoeontological arguments about contemporary issues. We now wait for other opportunities for further clarifications of them.

As to the potential issue you raised, I think I know the passage (just above the Conclusion) but this Thread is Dead so…

Posted by: Scorpion | Feb 25 2024 16:12 utc | 266

It’s actually right there in the conclusion you quoted itself. “One is responsible for the living order of all human beings”.
~
“One possible explanation for telepathy and certain paranormal phenomena is an unidentified sensory organ that works on principles of quantum entanglement.” @David G Horsman
That’s like saying the brain is an explanation for consciousness. Who is ducking now? When you reach for organs it betrays a prejudice towards functionalism. It is also “possible” that there are entirely reality-structural reasons for the phenomena. Your model of reality appears to be that of devices and organisms as emergent | epiphenomena in the classical realm, with the Q substrate for the hand waving part of the model. Now the hand waving part is fine since we can not understand the complete truth regarding Reality.
This is where experience and choice enter the picture, David.

Posted by: sunof27 | Feb 25 2024 16:51 utc | 268

FWLIW, I would translate ‘sprouts’ as ‘seeds’. Sounds better.
Posted by: Scorpion | Feb 23 2024 22:30 utc | 179
Thanks. Will take the time to read in next few days. About being versus living: Language: Living connotes the daily grind, the personal life journey; I think ‘being alive’ is better.
Posted by: Scorpion | Feb 25 2024 5:37 utc | 237
You do that. I look forward to a demonstration of your fluency in archaic Greek and “Chinese” if not *-English translations of secondary source material originally published in simplified Mandarin.
I would say Plato is closer to religion
Posted by: juliania | Feb 24 2024 16:35 utc | 204
Am I to under stand that you’ve read Timaeus, too, if not the corpus of pharaonic prescriptions for immortality?

Posted by: sln2002 | Feb 25 2024 17:08 utc | 270

tHE pop had officially owned nutjob Mike Adams crazy CONspiracy theory.
NO more excuse., pop.
QED
Posted by: denk | Feb 24 2024 2:28 utc | 185
——————–
If there’s a plan to break up Russia as per our pop, any counter plan from the Russians would be justified no, prof. ?
LIkewise,
FUKUS have been trying to break up China since time immemorial, surely any counter plan would be justified self defense no, prof ?
Except you have yet to show proof of a CPC/Russia./DOJ tie up to attack USAss with WMM ??
I say that anyone who believes a ‘Chinese invasion’ is a fucking moron, besides, you’r also a fucking liar to boot.
PS
to THE Pop’s army of admirers, is anyone able to muster a coherent response other than silly one liners ?
Take your med
Fuck off
Shut the fuck up
I feel like rearranging your face
blah blah
Even the Barflies scorned utube have more cogent commentators these days !
Else, how about simply blocking me off, like what our dear pop purportedly did ??

Posted by: denk | Feb 26 2024 2:05 utc | 272