Michael Payton
Listen carefully before you respond.
updated 15 years ago
Thank you in advance to Ali.
1. We have no reason to think that genes responsible for phenotypes of facial structure, bone structure or skin tone are identical to those genes responsible for neurological organization.
2. Protein selection is not entirely genetic because of pre-natal influences of hormones
3. Epigenetic selection suggests a high degree of interaction between genes and environment. The idea of seperating causal influences into either genetic or environmental categories presents a false dichotomy and ignores the evidence that environments impact genes directly.
Link to intelligence and epigenetic development: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892514
4. If intelligence is heretable then it would be positively selected for by natural selection and thus be rediscovered repeatedly in all cultures. But especially in cultures which require high degrees of specialized knowledge. Given these parameters, if anything, we would expect tribal societies to select for intelligence more directly than technological societies.
http://twitter.com/#!/MichaelPayton67
For more information on Unilateral Neglect:
http://marsicanus.free.fr/Publications/2007_Curr_Opin_Neurol.pdf
For more on Ape Self Recognition:
http://www.psychol.ucl.ac.uk/celia.heyes/Pdfs/1994%20Heyes%20Reflections.pdf
http://www.ctstv.com/michaelcoren/?vidID=22291
Follow me on Twitter:
http://twitter.com/#!/MichaelPayton67
Backfire Effect:
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2008/09/backfire-effect
http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/climate-weather/blogs/in-the-persuasion-game-beware-the-backfire-effect
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/14/AR2008091402375_pf.html
Full Paper on When Corrections Fail:
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bnyhan/nyhan-reifler.pdf
Full Article on the Science of why we don't believe science:
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/03/denial-science-chris-mooney?page=1
Full article on the Key Finding of modern Neuroscience:
motherjones.com/files/descartes.pdf
:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZo0DLKriDY&feature=channel_video_title
Check out Scott's channel here:
http://www.youtube.com/user/TheoreticalBullshit
User bdwilson: (http://www.youtube.com/user/bdwilson1000) also informs me you can find other objections to the Kalam here:
http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Kalam
Values are surely human institutions. Williams is quick to point out that rationality is too and for all of the same reasons. Why then should it be the case that we relegate morality to an island of obscurity?
In a set of videos to come shortly, myself and other members of Centre for Inquiry Canada will be speaking to the people at the heart of this issue.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/25/arts/design/25picasso.html?src=twrhp
...the assumption that because some quality or combination of qualities invariably and necessarily accompanies the quality of goodness, or is invariably and necessarily accompanied by it, or both, this quality or combination of qualities is identical with goodness. If, for example, it is believed that whatever is pleasant is and must be good, or that whatever is good is and must be pleasant, or both, it is committing the naturalistic fallacy to infer from this that goodness and pleasantness are one and the same quality. The naturalistic fallacy is the assumption that because the words 'good' and, say, 'pleasant' necessarily describe the same objects, they must attribute the same quality to them.
Link to Principia Ethica:
http://fair-use.org/g-e-moore/principia-ethica
Link to Intrinsic versus Extrinsic Value:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/value-intrinsic-extrinsic/\
Moral Non-naturalism:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-non-naturalism/
I maintain that Hume has been misinterpreted severely and the actual project of his Treatise was to explain facts of moral psychology against Christian thinkers. Not to set a standard of morality which is completely divorced from the rest of the natural world
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jD5Vy87ACDQ
Much of the work here I have to credit to the work of John Rawls and Jerome Schneewind for making a readily accessible set of material for learning the history of moral philosophy in a short period of time.
Also some of the people in York's philosophy department for tutoring me well enough that I could do this in one take.
For more on fractals in Pollack's paintings see the following:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/02/books/02frac.html?_r=1
http://www.youtube.com/user/CFIOntario
ThinkAgain!'s page:
http://www.youtube.com/user/ThinkAgainCFI
Blair... animation GOD's page:
http://www.youtube.com/user/LordNapalm
This will likely be a three part program.
still waiting for James to respond though...
Before I burned my DAA t-shirt and threw away the club membership, I thought I would make an argument against one key area of Marxist thought in Das Kapital and explain why economists not longer take it seriously.
To make it clear... here are my contentions:
1) intrinsic theories of value do not accurately reflect why people make economic decisions
2) theory of value is central to Marxist thought, although his humanitarianism deserves respect, it shouldn't be the focus of the discussion
3) The combination of intrinsic theories of value and command economics is anti-democratic
Remember to let me know what i should focus on and I can get right on it.
Here is Center for Inquiry Canada:
www.cficanada.ca
Questions about CFI Contact:
info@cficanada.ca
Donate what you can here!:
www.cficanada.ca/support
Here is Center for Inquiry Canada:
www.cficanada.ca
Questions about CFI Contact:
info@cficanada.ca
Donate what you can here!:
www.cficanada.ca/support
http://www.youtube.com/user/SupportLocalScene
http://www.youtube.com/user/BibleBarney
The original can be found here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLO0EESjgWY
You can see his original video here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7QQ_9Qahaw
Graffight brought up a number of points all of which were important. Here I only decided to focus on the ones that I felt most clearly expressed his position and afforded me the ability to respond meaningfully.
This is not an attack on God. This is not an attack on Dr. Craig. This is an attack on the theory of ethics based on Divine Command.
The Audio was taken from The Reasonable Faith Podcast:
Did God Commit Atrocities in the Old Testament?
08-03-03
Part 1
http://www.equalismactivism.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/rob-breakenridge-atheist-obediance-april1-2010-full_001.mp3
Part 2
http://www.equalismactivism.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/rob-breakenridge-atheist-obediance-april1-2010-full_002.mp3
Part 3
http://www.equalismactivism.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/rob-breakenridge-atheist-obediance-april1-2010-full_003.mp3
Free Speech in Universities:
http://www.cbc.ca/checkup/archive/2010/100328CC.mp3
Reporting on New Age Fair:
http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/03/19/justin-trottier-and-michael-payton-if-it-talks-like-a-quack.aspx
Moral Distance:
http://www.yorku.ca/mm_rsrch/psychological_distance
Thanks!
Libet's Experiment can be found here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQ4nwTTmcgs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0w58-hnUOo
Here are some links to her videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJDeDKUxVPg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iF5JT3_ZJGE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rSqDt4V9oE


