(split) Atheism and acceptance of science

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by S.A.M., Jul 10, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    Study? Hell, I've published on those topics. Although I'm not a biochemist, and am not sure what "selfish gene-oriented" is supposed to mean.

    Also I wouldn't put Markov chains in the class of biologically-inspired computation. Neural nets and evolutionary programs would be the other big ones (to the extent the difference between a genetic algorithm and an evolutionary program is anything more than the difference between a degree in CS and one in EE, that is).

    "Metaphor?" Evolutionary programs are actual instances of these mechanisms. The selfish gene interpretation is just as applicable here as in biological evolution (well, with the modification that it's now a selfish "machine parameter" or somesuch).
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,855
    Become a nutritionist

    http://www.gcnm.com/nutritional-consultant-program.html
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    37,359
    Thanks for the confirmation.

    If you're going to be employed as a scientist, don't you need a tertiary degree in science in the United States? How strange.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Yes and post graduate studies in nutrition also qualify you as a nutritionist. But nutrition is a vast field and one needs to usually select a specialisation between foods, nutrition [clinical, biochemical, institutional] and dietetics.
     
  8. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    37,359
    I don't get it. I thought that post-graduate studies in nutrition qualified you as a dietician. Didn't we just go through this?

    Also, you didn't respond to my question about scientists in the US. In Australia, to be employed as a scientist you need a university degree in science. That's not the same as the situation where you can set up shop as a nutritionist without any qualifications. Is it?
     
  9. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    We were discussing how your personality interferes with productive discussion.

    Reflexes don't "travel" anywhere. It's signals that travel.

    Again, you illustrate how poor the stream analogy is in the first place. There are signals going in multiple directions through multiple pathways here (stimuli going from the nerve endings, through the spinal cord, and into the brain, control signals from the brain making the reverse trip, and other pathways that don't even include the brain at all), which is not a feature exhibited by actual streams.
     
  10. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Dietetics is a certificate course, which one can complete along with a baccalaureate in nutrition. It requires a set period of hospital or industry internship and a course in meal planning, restaurant/institutional management and clinical nutrition all of which are generally available in undergraduate nutrition.

    I said Yes, which means Yes, a post graduate degree in nutrition qualifies you to work as a scientist in the field you have specialised in.
     
  11. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    The history of our species is all about overcoming nature: building tools, taming fire and eventually learning to create it, inventing clothing, curing disease, cultivating plants and domesticating animals to prevent famine, etc. Ultimately we turned our attention to overcoming our own nature, particularly our pack-social instinct: living in harmony with others who are not members of our own pack (or even our own species), accepting the leadership of people we've never met, caring about and depending on people thousands of miles away who are nothing more than abstractions. So it's not remarkable that we've overcome the nature of our genes too. We've created a new organism, civilization, in which we are the cells. The rules have changed.
    I too am flabbergasted by the things Sam doesn't know about biology, like reflex centers. She must be a product of the American educational system. They were too busy giving courses in remedial English to people who shouldn't even be attending universities to worry about their biology curriculum.
    I'm no apologist for Sam but she hardly ever proselytizes her religion and in fact seldom puts her theistic statements in the context of Abrahamic religion at all, much less Islamic. She speaks for theism.
    And I've never seen her evangelize. She doesn't want to convert us. She just wants to be treated with respect. Which is something I could do almost anywhere but here, because this is a place of science and her supernaturalism conflicts with the scientific method. Even then I wouldn't be so pissed off if she would just find a way to make her points honestly instead of relying so often on disingenuity.
    Excuse me, that was me, the Head Linguist around here. It isn't exclusively about boating but it is about life on the river. It's used in IT, manufacturing, and several biological specialties, always with the analogy of the direction of flow of a river.
    Are you really talking about trolling, posts that are not germaine to a discussion? Or simply insults? Even so, although we do permit the wholesale insulting of religion, specific religions, and religious communities, we are not supposed to allow personal insults against specific members. Please notify me the next time it happens. I see the banter on this thread comes pretty close, but for the most part the members are criticizing your style of argument and/or specific things you've said. As I noted above, even I am a little frstrated that one of this forum's very few actual career scientists has such a narrow scope of knowledge. Nonetheless:

    * * * * NOTE FROM A MODERATOR * * * *

    This isn't my board so I don't have the authority to rap anybody's knuckles with my ruler for violating the rules, but please, everybody:

    TRY TO KEEP THE DISCOURSE CIVIL.

    We need at least one theist here to hold up the theistic side of the argument, so we should not treat her like an unwelcome guest.
    Indeed.
     
  12. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    The title "scientist" isn't controlled in any official way, so the only requirement for employment as such is the availability of an employer that would like to hire you to do science.

    That said, most of the real science jobs are managed well enough that people without sufficient credentials stand no chance. Often, even people with bachelor's degrees face long odds.

    But there are exceptions. For example certain people get some technical training in the military and end up getting enough work experience to continue working as scientists or engineers (although usually they're constrained to a very specific sub-sub-field).
     
  13. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Signals from reflexes then.

    Agreed. Which is my point with the selfish gene theory as well. The genes do not replicate themselves, the proteins make the genes, the genes are obtained from two parents, they cross over, get mutated and repaired constantly and their functioning depends on environmental signals.
     
  14. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    37,359
    SAM:

    I'm confused now. You said:

    Now you've said that:

    I read this as saying that to call yourself a "dietician" you need at least a certificate of dietetics or an undergraduate degree in nutrition.

    But then you wrote:

    This appears to be a diversion from the point you initially acknowledged, which was that the title "nutritionist" can be adopted by anyone, regardless of qualifications.

    Probably my misunderstanding is because you weren't clear about your use of the word "scientist". You must have meant that anybody can call themselves a "nutrition scientist" without having formal qualifications in either nutrition or science, or something like that. I thought you were referring to people in fields such as physics or chemistry calling themselves "scientists", which I believe requires a tertiary degree in the same way that dieticians require certification.

    Correct me if I'm wrong. To earn a living as a scientist in the United States normally requires that you have a formal qualification in science, but to earn a living as a nutritionist you don't need any formal qualifications. Right?
     
  15. noodler Banned Banned

    Messages:
    751
    The selfish machine metaphor prompts the query: is selfishness recursive, or iterative?

    If I descend (iteratively and recursively) into the selfish metaphor, am I being selfish If I write a program that acts "selfishly" and competes too well? If so, should I program in a bit less 'selfishness" (recursively, etc).

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  16. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    She does do quite a bit of talking about theism writ large, but other than that I disagree.

    Again, I do not agree. The vast efforts she expends preaching to strangers about the evils of atheism (not to mention, Judaism) add up to evangelism in my book. She doesn't seem to want to personally participate in anyone's actual conversion, but the basic goal seems the same.

    Also do not agree. That she views herself as persecuted does not mean that she is, nor that she would prefer not to feel persecuted. Note that when she lacks sufficiently incendiery material to react to, she goes out of her way to provoke it. It is clear to me that she enjoys this sort of conflict, and that the persecution complex functions to maintain it in perpetuity.
     
  17. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    It depends on what kind of nutritionist you are. Hospitals and food industries will not hire you without post-graduate qualifications. Newspapers and extension workers will.

    As for scientist, I think it depends on the field. Nutrition science requires a post grad degree.
     
  18. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    That's about right, except that certain states do regulate the title "nutritionist." Not sure how many, though, or what qualifications are associated with those certifications.
     
  19. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Just a note: the conversation is once again, about my credentials or qualifications and personality. This is not considered as trolling since even mods and admin are doing it
     
  20. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    So what? The gene-centered view of evolution doesn't imply that genes self-replicate, never mutate, ignore the environment, etc.

    You'd know this if you understood the interpretation in the first place.
     
  21. Dub_ Strange loop Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    156
    ...are you asking if selfishness is defined in terms of itself? :wtf:

    Can I get a little clarification here?
     
  22. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    Note that you show no hesitation about indulging such conversations. So your complaints are hard to take seriously.
     
  23. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    The selfish gene theory is based on a replicator gene. In actual fact, no gene is copied from itself.

    As I said, I ignore a lot more trolling than I respond to.

    Also there is no danger of any of my complaints being taken seriously by the present set of admins.
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2009
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page