The evolution of skill
- Started
- Last post
- 39 Responses
- Mimio0
Travolta is the modern day Giotto.
- gramme0
bloody amazing
- lvl_130
i thought this thread was going to be:
http://www.rockandrollconfidenti…damnit! ;)
- flagellum0
brookoi: ad hominems aren't going to persuade anyone to embrace your chance-worshipping mystery religion. You're going to have to actually present some kind of argument.
And yes, the book I linked is unashamedly anti-materialistic mythology (a myth which has disenfranchised so many). And it's fascinating to see how the data demonstrates that the genius of nature could not be the product of chance + necessity.
And I have no idea who this "partisan group" is, which you speak of.
- frankiefido0
they will soon cross dolphins and humans, you know.
- Brookoioioi0
If i'd wanted to make a 'ad hominem'
attack i'd of pointed out that a philosopher and a phd lit graduate are not qualified to write about science. Especially when they're obviously so religiously biased.My post, which you per usual clumsily avoided, was about a specific claim, and how stupid it was. Clearly not 'ad hominem'
- flagellum0
Brookoi: You haven't the faintest idea what the book is about. Yet you dismiss a priori. (Because you're tragically dishonest, of course).
The book is an assault on *philosophical* materialism, using emperical evidence. Who better to write about philosophical underpinnings than philosopher phD's??? I'll give you a minute to put on your thinking cap and try to factor that one out.
Further, everyone has some form of bias. This why we have to look at the arguments/data on it's own merits. (It doesn't take an expert logician to figure this out. ;)) This is why I've given that sophist Dawkins a chance despite the fact that he's a flaming atheist fundamentalist.
- Brookoioioi0
If i didn't have a life and a job i'd probably enjoy taking your nonsense posts apart. Fortunately i have both. I doubt you read Dawkins, or anything of any great worth.
- flagellum0
Nice dodge, Brookoioi.
it's a pity though... I do love to dismantle Darwinian nonsense since it's so obvious that the myth never had anything to do with either ontogeny or phylogeny. Its in it's death throes and I am very pleased to see it gurgling for dear life.
- Brookoioioi0
you're seriously delusional man. get some professional help. You need some education.
- blaw0
just kidding:
www.youtube.com/watch?...
Baskerville
(Feb 8 07, 04:05)----
holy fuck @ that link. thanks!
- de4k0
paused Half Man Half Biscuit to watch that.
holy shit.
- lemmys_wart0
holy shit @ the world record cup stacker...
that chick could weave the fuck out of some baskets.
- mrdobolina0
flagellum, did jesus teach you to be so smug all of the time?
- lemmys_wart0
@ baskerville's original post...
jazz mirrors that sort of progressive complexity.
though it moved (much, much) further in decades than the "classical" form did in centuries.
the "old counrty" was stiff and conservative...
ours is wildly liberal and technically advanced...
...it's the evolution of that culture (memes), not biology (genes) that's the driving force.
although the host is a bit of a douche, the bbc doc "how art made the world" is right up your alley.
- lemmys_wart0
dont feed the flage dobs, he fucked up a good thread enough already...
- ribit0
But is there any evolution or improvement in human capabilities at work here?
Maybe its more about where you want to expend you effort and imagination. For example you'd have a hard time getting people today to work on a project to "land on the moon!", because its already been done...
so you have to set the target higher (Mars), and we all get to work, and perform about the same as the people who worked on getting man to the moon, and eventually we get to Mars... about an equal achievement for our time and technology in 2030? as those who got to the moon in 1969.
- moldero0
writing music vs playing music. 2 very different things.
:)
- lemmys_wart0
inovation vs. monkey see. monkey do.
absolutely.