Got a question


To all of you, but especially those who have spent quite an amount of time studying psychology.

Is man a product of nature or nurture? Put differently, does a man become or he is?

About makagutu

As Onyango Makagutu I am Kenyan, as far as I am a man, I am a citizen of the world

536 thoughts on “Got a question

  1. Ignostic Atheist says:

    Yes

    Like

  2. Mordanicus says:

    We could state that nurture is actually a part of nature. For instance if the manner how to raise and cultivate people is determined by our genetic make up, our nurturing is also part of nature. If we accept this line of reasoning, the question would be meaningless since there would be no contrast between these terms.

    Like

    • archaeopteryx1 says:

      I must disagree, Mordanicus – there are millions of species who lay eggs, then go their merry way, leaving their hatchlings to fend for themselves.

      Like

      • Arch, how would you define nurture? By human standards? Regarding a sea turtle, is not spending hours digging a hole to lay eggs nurture? Then she buries the eggs. Burying the eggs serves three purposes: it helps protect the eggs from surface predators; it helps keep the soft, porous shells moist, thus protecting them from drying out; and it helps the eggs maintain proper temperature. How does a sea turtle defend 50 to 200 hatchlings?

        Like

    • makagutu says:

      Put in the manner you have, you just made my question meaningless.
      Is a life of crime part of the genetic make up or is it possible to grow in such a clime and not lean to criminal tendencies? This is what am trying to get an answer to.

      Like

      • Mordanicus says:

        There genetic diseases we can heal with medication or surgery. Hence it would be possible to some extent to modify certain genetic psychological tendencies.

        Like

  3. I’d say both nature and nurture. But, Mordanicus made a good point that “nurture is actually a part of nature.”

    Like

  4. archaeopteryx1 says:

    My high school science teacher once told me you can never separate heredity from environment.

    Like

    • Yep. Robert Sapolsky, professor of Biological Sciences, Neurology and Neurological Sciences at Stanford University states in his article “Peace Among Primates:

      “To an overwhelming extent, the age-old “nature versus nurture” debate is silly. The action of genes is completely intertwined with the environment in which they function; in a sense, it is pointless to even discuss what gene X does, and we should consider instead only what gene X does in environment Y.”

      Like

      • makagutu says:

        On gene action am in agreement with the professor.

        I will use an example to describe my question. Does the sort of environment a person grows in determine what they become?

        Like

    • makagutu says:

      Does it mean if a child grows up in a n environment where there are gangs, that is what he becomes? Can he be different?

      Like

      • Not necessarily, but he/she at a greater risk. If he has a primary caregiver who is nurturing — has established a bond/attachment, he/she may not be as likely to look to gangs to have a sense of belonging. But, say you are told from early childhood (brain plasticity at a crucial age) that it is honorable to become a suicide bomber in the name of Allah, then there’s a good chance, I would think, that they would become one.

        Like

  5. Both. I concur with Mordanicus — nurture is a part of nature.

    Like

    • Couldn’t agree more Victoria. No matter what a person’s genetic “potential” may be, it is rendered meaningless if the environment said person develops in is negligent, abusive, or destructive.

      Like

      • makagutu says:

        Is it possible for a person to come out of such an environment different?

        Like

        • Mordanicus says:

          Maybe as a result of random quantum fluctuations.

          Like

        • Different than what? Is it possible for a person who, since infancy was beaten, starved and denied affection to come out of it unscathed and “normal”? No. It is not. We could experiment on twins to show this. You know, take one away at birth and abuse the hell of it while denying it love, while showering the other with care and tenderness, but I should hope you’d know instinctively why this would be immoral, as well as what the outcome would be. Lack of positive attachment for humans during the developmental years is a horrible thing. The outcomes vary according to duration of abuse and neglect, and whether or not positive attachment of some kind with someone was ever developed. To develop in isolation, surrounded with nothing but violence, pain, and negligence will not lead to positive life outcomes. I challenge anyone to show me otherwise, with themselves as the guinea pig. Victoria will have much more information on the neurobiology of this, but be rest assured, years of neglect, abuse, and torture have horrible effects on human beings, regardless of what they think they were born with.

          Like

          • makagutu says:

            Different here I meant. To be brought up in an environment infested with gangs, for example, and not be a gang member. To be different than what what we would expect given the environment. For example to be born and brought up by the mob and not be the mob.?

            Victoria has provided much information so far as you mentioned.

            Taking an adult would be too late.

            What of a situation where there is no abuse. What is lacking is any moulding in a specific direction?

            Like

            • Attachment in a nurturing way to a primary caregiver is imperative. The environment outside outside of that isn’t as important. The two are not separable and yes, the question is muted because of it. A newborn human can not grow to maturation in a vacuum, alone. He or she must form attachments. This is true of all mammals, humans most of all. It isn’t true of every living thing on Earth, but it is true of mammals. I grew up surrounded by violent gangs, but did not become a gang banger. The horrific nature of the abuse I suffered from my immediate care givers over rode any effect the outside environment had. And the question you ask implicitly involves the question of abuse as it relates to mental health world wide. It is far easier to dismiss poverty, emotional suffering, and a lack of access to decent education when the problem is blamed on “nature.” This issue is also at the core of what I call “scientific racism.” Some believe, wrongly so, that it is nature and not environmental factors that keep blacks in poverty in ghettos in America and whites on top of the political and financial food chain. The DNA of African Americans is not as “tough” or “smart” as that of people with white European ancestry. This belief is both scientifically wrong, and blatantly racist as well as dangerous. The two things do not exist separately for human beings. The only people benefiting from keeping such questions alive and ignoring what neuroscience teaches us about human brain development are bigots, power hungry politicians, and racial elitists who believe nature and/or god has blessed then with superior genes. Genes that allow them to justify their abhorrent views on the poor, the emotionally damaged, and anyone else not falling into their narrow view of what is and what is not the superior race of people.

              Like

      • Precisely, Jeff. We can look at Romanian orphanages during the 80’s and 90’s and the disturbing outcomes of those children and understand how important environment is to the development of the brain and mental health.

        We can look at the comprehensive CDC study “Adverse Childhood Experiences” (ACE) to know the profound effects of environment on humans. The study was one of the largest investigations ever conducted to assess associations between childhood maltreatment and later-life health and well-being. There really is no debate.

        Like

        • makagutu says:

          Thanks Victoria.
          This is interesting information. I should look at it.

          Like

        • And to those who want one (a debate) I offer this: Let me have 5 years of your life, locked in my cellar, with no one but me to deal with so I can abuse you in any way I see fit, and tell me you’ll be just hunky dory afterward. You won’t be. I’ll make damn sure of it. And this experiment takes only fully developed, consenting know-it-all adults as participants. Now image this done to a human starting at infancy. Bullshit that person will be fine. Absolute bullshit.

          Like

          • I agree, Jeff. There is much evidence via brain scans showing brain atrophy in children who have been neglected and abused. Nearly half the size of a normal brain in some cases. That doesn’t mean that their brain development will always remain stunted, but the effects of such abuse and/or neglect will show itself in other ways — often ways (health issues and risky behavior like smoking, taking drugs, etc) that have not, until recently, been associated with lack of nurture. A lack of nurture and/or not feeling safe in one’s environment can cause brain damage and pons dysfunction.

            Like

            • Indeed. Unless, of course, I were to believe humans were somehow “unnatural” and had a “will” free of the plain of reality all around us. But this belief, if I held it, would be an unsubstantiated boat of baloney. Many religions use this baloney, christian ones in particular, to control the minds of the unwary and program them to believe in invisible bogey men and fantastical creatures with wings that spew out vile hatred in words written in ancient text which have no real worth but to the fools who think it’s real. Sad really, that those who believe such tripe lack the self-awareness to see it for the tripe it is. Oh, to be unnatural instead of lacking a moral conscience like I do. But, on the tasty side of life, if I weren’t the amoral, atheist bastard I am, I’d never have learned just how tasty christian infant tartare is. See, not everything is bad.

              Like

              • 😈 Need BBQ sauce, mayo, ketchup or mustard to go with those tasty youngens or do you prefer suchi style?

                Like

                • Just a dash of red pepper is enough for me. My washing machine is stuck on “perceptual cycle”. Gotta run and fix it, or my clothes will all come out looking like biblical tunics. Can’t have that. Have you noticed how scary the question Noel asks here is to those with a christian bend to their nurtured thoughts? It’s as if a great fear comes over them when they contemplate the reality that what they think of as their inherently divine free will is a culturally implanted thought. They were nurtured to believe it. It is not divine nor is it “unnatural.”

                  Like

          • makagutu says:

            It is hard that person will be fine, not with you as the scientist 😀

            Like

    • makagutu says:

      Let us consider a situation where the child is brought up in a environment free of abuse, that is, what we would call a normal home and no attempt is made to mould her a specific way, would this be a child of nature or nurture?

      Like

      • “Let us consider a situation where the child is brought up in a environment free of abuse, that is, what we would call a normal home and no attempt is made to mould her a specific way, would this be a child of nature or nurture?”

        I’m not sure I follow. All experiences whether positive or negative, whether intentional or not will affect brain plasticity and gene expression. The fact that no attempt is made to mold a child in a specific way is still an experience. So again, I say both.

        Like

  6. keithnoback says:

    The last word is never in, though the gist of the story is often set. See ‘perceptual cycle’.

    Like

  7. magnocrat says:

    When man became self -aware he ceased to be completely natural. He gained freedom of will and a moral conscience and became a moral being in an amoral universe.

    Like

    • john zande says:

      The universe is neither moral or amoral. It just is, and all sentient life is self-aware. I think what you might be referring to is the growth of our enormous frontal cortex which enabled humans, moreso than our mammalian cousins, to play the prediction game better than anyone else.

      Like

      • magnocrat says:

        So when a hurricane destroys a city it is not amoral? Man knows moral purpose he does not always follow it but he knows.
        When a cat kills a mother bird so her young die in the nest is that moral behaviour? Only man is self aware he knows what he is doing he has the make choices he knows good and evil.

        Like

        • john zande says:

          Are you implying a cyclone acts intelligently, that it is sent? Does the cat kill the bird to make its orphaned young suffer, or does it kill the bird so it can eat, and survive?

          You’re dead wrong on thinking only man, the risen ape, can distinguish between right and wrong. Complex moral behaviour has been studied in chimps for decades, including an acute sense of fair play. Clearly, the capacity to empathise with other sentience is a function of the frontal lobe, and from the capacity for empathy comes more complex, culturally determined senses of morality and ethics.

          Like

          • magnocrat says:

            Not at all it has no intelligence and therefore no morals you can’t have moral direction without intelligence. The cat has no ability to judge its own actions, they are instinctive it cannot be blamed it is unaware and therefore cannot act morally.
            The behaviour you speak of in apes is just like that we suppose happened in early man before he became self -aware and his conscience developed. The conscience and hence religious thought probably started in the old stone age but we cannot be sure about that.

            Like

            • john zande says:

              I think you’re going to have to describe what you mean here by “self aware.”

              Finding agency in the natural world is a bias exhibited by all advanced creatures. It’s an evolutionary response to things feared but unseen, and part of the prediction game necessary for survival. Religion (supernal dreams) most likely started with the first Paleolithic burials with grave goods where man imagined (for the first time) the dead person having some sort of existence outside of this terrestrial one; a place where the dead person had a use for tools and trinkets which are only truly useful to the living. Ancestor cults predate the more complex imaginings contained in animism and totemism, which in-turn pre-date all forms of pantheism, paganism, and anthropomorphic theism.

              Like

              • magnocrat says:

                Man was created by the blind watchmaker as described by Richard Dawkins. When he became aware of this he escaped the power of survival of the fittest or natural selection. Conscience was born and he had a choice.

                Like

                • john zande says:

                  You think we’ve stepped outside the rules and parameters of evolution by natural selection? I assure you, we have not.

                  Like

                  • magnocrat says:

                    Yes we have we are aware of creation we know about the watchmaker we create in our own right. The blind unthinking watchmaker has in his blindness made us who can think. Some talk about the wonderful works of nature how can nature be wonderful when she is blind. Man has left that behind he has moral awareness and can create what nature never can.

                    Like

                • makagutu says:

                  No no, the Blind watch maker analogy is a response to the watch maker argument. I don’t think Dawkins would refer to man being created as that would imply a creator[s] beings for which we have no evidence.
                  I don’t think you understand what survival for the fittest implies in natural selection

                  Like

                  • Very few people do. They think it implies physical power and strength only. This is false. Dinosaurs were huge and powerful, many were anyway, but they were wiped out because they were not fit for the environmental change in the Earth’s climate after the asteroid hit. Smaller, less abundant and physically weaker, furry mammals were. They survived and bred and took the reigns from their big-ass reptilian cousins.T-rexes they were not. Fittest does not necessarily mean smartest, strongest or biggest. Adaption through random mutation to random shifts in the environment is how evolution works. Will power, dual selves and planned tough guy training has nothing to do with it. We have absolutely no control over natural selection. I mean here natural selection, not the gene selecting we do in order to breed cuter puppies and tougher skinned tomatoes.

                    Like

                  • magnocrat says:

                    Yes I have just read Richard Dawkins book he uses the term blind to make clear that natural selection has no intelligence or direction yet by means of natural selection it has produced us. He implies that the whole universe in its intricate complexity has evolved with out intelligent design.

                    Like

                    • Yep. As a matter of fact, there are whole groups of people, theists, who exist right now without the slightest sign of intelligence at all. They look human; some even talk, but few, if any, can think, at least not in a manner one would say is intelligent. They are just a random occurrence – for surely no designer would have designed such things on purpose. And, like mosquitoes, they can be quite annoying with their constant buzzing and parasitic blood sucking. In some countries, there are laws that allow them to be swatted away with big “theist” swatters. I bet that’s fun.

                      Like

                    • magnocrat says:

                      You might call them groups but they are no more groups than Welshmen or Englishmen or Indians they are Certainly not as group like as acorns or bees.

                      Like

                    • You’re right. They’re more like ants, or better yet, mealy bugs – those white sticky insects that spread nastiness all over your plants. The Irish don’t do that, nor the Brits, nor groups of French people. Only annoying insects do that. Annoying, smug, nasty insects that gather in groups and spread pestilence, fear, and contagion every place they go. Damn. I hate generalizations. Don’t you?

                      Like

        • True. My moral purpose, and a damn good one too, I might add, as far as moral purposes go anyway, is to eat as many christians as I can catch. They don’t like it, but I do. And because I do. It’s righteous and just. Love always, Sheikh Pontificatius, the Unshaven.

          Like

          • magnocrat says:

            Don’t be greedy Muslims and Hindoos and a multitude of other labels all make good food for those who can digest them. A word of warning Atheists are very gristly they have little softness about them so sharpen your meat eating teeth when you bite into them.
            Spare those noble scientists at the cutting edge of phantasy they keep us entertained as the planet hastens towards breakdown.

            Like

            • makagutu says:

              Hindoos being mostly vegeterian might actually have very tender meat. We are not eating atheists though.

              Like

              • I ate an agnostic once, after telling him to pick a fucking side or get off the pot. Tasted icky. Christians are the way to go. Specially if they have a “duel” nature, whatever the fuck that is. It’s like you get two meals in one body only one isn’t really there at all. They just believe it is and think we’re wrong for not sharing the same schizophrenic delusion. Hey! That reminds me why I eat them. They bother the shit outta me. Love always, Sheikh Pontificatius, the Unshaven.

                Like

                • makagutu says:

                  Hahahaha!
                  You eat two natures except one ain’t there! You know how to reduce this duality to meaninglessness.
                  Thank you Sheikh, Nobel Prize almost winner

                  Like

                  • Praise be unto Allah, my brother.

                    Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Piss be unto Allah, the magnificent and malevolent

                      Like

                    • Just for that, I’m taking away 2 virgins from your after-life bedroom. There! Now who’s laughing, wise guy!?

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Take them all away. Who is laughing now 🙂

                      Like

                    • LMAO — What kind of idiot would get a boner over the promise of 70+ virgins? Oh wait…

                      Like

                    • archaeopteryx1 says:

                      LMAO — What kind of idiot would get a boner over the promise of 70+ virgins? Oh wait…

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Hahaha! That sounds more like it

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      It is difficult to understand the musulman obsession with virgins, many virgins. It has been said this a transliteration of the word but still…….

                      Like

                    • One of the main reasons is that due to their customs — many men will not find a mate in Muslim cultures. Muslim men can have up to 4 wives. As of 2014, the global sex ratio at birth is estimated at 107 boys to 100 girls. In some places in the Middle East, men outnumber women 4 to 1 primarily because their culture devalues females and they die for various reasons. It doesn’t take a mathematician to figure this one out. Create an artificial shortage and bam — you’ve got a bunch of young men flushed with testosterone who will become sacrificial loyalist of Islam. They are promised they will fuck for eternity in paradise.

                      They are even promised an eternal boner.

                      Mohammad and his ilk took a basic human instinct and magnified it. It was a brilliant, sadistic strategy and it worked.

                      Like

                    • The women in Muslim cultures are on a shortage due to their untimely death from various stonings. If they’d just stop forcing men to want them, the damn harpies, the stonings could all but be eliminated. Oh well. Faith.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      So these guys are making an already dire situation worse. No wonder it is easy to have suicide bombers in some areas

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Just finished that article, very interesting read.
                      Studies into human nature fascinate me.

                      Like

                    • Me, too. Just goes to show you have little our mainstream gods knew about human nature. 😉

                      Thanks for taking the time to read the article.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      It’s the least I can do. You share quite a wealth of information.

                      Like

                    • That they want virgins is odd enough, but that they want and get them AFTER they die is even more idiotic. Christ, even Catholic priest little boy rapists take their booty while their alive. Guess it actually would be better for little boys if Catholic priest rapists waited til they (the priests) were dead to do their raping. Oh well. Faith. Wadda ya gonna do?

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Once I read, if a person has believed the first big lie, that there is a cosmic overlord taking care of us, he can believe anything. To want to have virgins, 70 of them after you die is real madness.

                      Like

                    • One last note — virgins are generally young, with taut bodies and tight you know whats. Also, virgins will have nothing to compare the lousy fucker to. It’s a psychological thing. It’s no surprise to find out that these virgins will magically remain taut, tight virgins for eternity even after their cherries are plucked. 😉

                      Again, I digress, lol.

                      Like

                    • It’s nice to see you using the word “fuck” more often, Victoria. Congrats!

                      Like

                    • Hahah — thank you. Is that nature or nurture? 😀

                      Like

                    • Nurture. You’ve been reading my blog and comments so long it’s sunk in. 😀

                      Like

                    • I’ve been saying it quite a lot lately after the five fuckers in the SC made their fucking ruling.

                      Here’s my response to them.

                      Like

                    • The mother fuckers. Catholics too, I believe. Mother fuckers.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Now that you brought this up, this always makes me laugh.

                      Like

                    • LMFAO — that was hilarious and so true.

                      Like

                    • archaeopteryx1 says:

                      tight you know whats” – I think it rhymes with “whats” —

                      Like

                    • Yet another man who’s afraid to say vagina.

                      This was a setup. Sucker. 😛

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Are they perpetual virgins? And do these fuckers go as virgins or what happens?

                      Like

                    • Well, their god, Allah, magically restores their hymen each time they are fucked. I kid you not. That’s what Muslim men are taught.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      We need more volunteers to kill gods. They have been the source of a lot of misery in our world and sad thing they don’t even exist

                      Like

                    • True. They were made in the image of humankind and to keep these gods alive they create laws to enforce forced births. It is the methodology used in mainstream, male-dominated religions and fascism.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      The question to ask is why do we have so many women in church when religion or its creators seem not to think them significant.

                      Like

                    • Noel, I read a excellent paper a while back about why women have attended church throughout history. It’s after midnight here. I’ve been out all day and evening so I’ll look for the paper tomorrow. Anyway — women are leaving the church. It wasn’t long ago that when a woman got married she lost her personhood by law — including women in the United States. They became servants to their husbands.

                      For women, church was their only means to be around other adults besides their ruling husbands, but as noted in the paper I’ll share tomorrow, there are several other relevant reasons that you probably never thought about. In the mean time I’ll leave this with you from the Christian Post.
                      ————
                      “[…gone are the days when women were traditionally the spiritual leader of the family home.

                      Pollster and researcher George Barna released a report on religious changes in America this week revealing some surprising results. Barna concludes that women have experienced a significant spiritual change in the past two decades.

                      Women today are attending church and Sunday school less, reading the Bible less, and consider their faith less important in their lives, according to the new survey.

                      The Barna report also shows that over the last two decades women have become less likely to hold traditional views of God as the all-knowing creator and ruler of the universe. Women today are less likely to see the devil as a real person, considering him more a “symbol of evil.”

                      http://www.christianpost.com/news/shocking-poll-women-are-falling-away-from-religion-53352/

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      This must be an interesting study. Waiting for it.
                      I sure hope women stop going to church, most will close down

                      Like

                    • That’s right — they will close down. Why do you think the religious right are doing everything in their power to keep women pregnant, uneducated, and dependent on men. Since more women in America are attending college and graduating than men, it’s no surprise that church attendance has dropped. Education scares the shit out of power addicts.

                      Noel — I looked for that study which is basically a meta study, and couldn’t find it. I have it somewhere in my files, but I promise to deliver as time permits.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      No problem friend.
                      I cant say the same is happening here. Churches are full of women and young girls. I think I should start going to one I may change my single status 🙂

                      Like

                    • LOL — You’d have to train her to think for herself. Are you up for the challenge?

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Well am a patient man. I could give it a try

                      Like

                    • Are you serious? How idiotic. I watch this vampire show called “True Blood.” In it a girl gets turned into a vampire as a virgin, and her hymen grows back after each time she has sex. It’s a funny premise for a FANTASY show. But these idiots have faith that there “vampire” story is true. What idiots!

                      Like

                    • I’m serious. I was looking for that link from a Muslim website I posted on one of John’s blog posts a while back. It was an extensive debate — haven’t found it yet.

                      Like

                    • Religion is a comic book that idiots are too stupid to realize isn’t real. OMG!!!! What idiots.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      There are people I think who when they watch a superhero movie must believe what they see it true.

                      Like

                    • You mean Captain America ISN’T real? OMG!! You’ve ruined my life!!!

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Just for you, Captain America is real. We still need you preparing recipes of how to eat cook christians

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      And its angels

                      Like

                    • LOL — Where do you think the writers of vampire fantasy got their ideas from? 😉

                      Mainstream religions/cults are obsessed with blood and virgins The Twilight movies were Mormon influenced. Most don’t know that, though.

                      Like

                    • I didn’t know that. One of my all time fav SciFi shows Battle Star Galactica, the recent one, is based very much on Mormon mythology.

                      Like

                    • I didn’t know that. Looks like they are planting seeds everywhere.

                      Like

                    • Yep. Seeds from outer space or whatever they believe. Mormons are about as unchristian as you can get with space god and all that, yet they hide behind the christian veil in order to be part of this bloody fascist christian government of ours.

                      Like

                    • Yep — more horny toads wanting lots of women to fuck when they get to their own planet. Like Islam, the women have to remain monogamous. They, too, are using the same manipulation and magnification on our basic human instincts.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      I think if there is something religions have known to use, it is our animal drives and sex being the strongest, they have used it manipulate their follows and gone to the extent of controlling their lives.

                      Like

                    • These religions, like Islam and Mormonism also cater to a natural phenomena that occurs in all mammals that have been studied — The Coolidge Effect

                      Jeff, it becomes quite comical when you see just how transparent their beliefs and behaviors are. A true nature/nurture phenomena. Nature provides the urge to copulate for the sake of gene diversity, and religious nurture promises that this urge to fuck multiple females will be met in paradise if you sign up. Aren’t they cunning?

                      Like

                    • They are. I read a good book called “The God Virus” by Dr. Darrel Ray. In it he describes the amazing similarities between religions and infectious, dangerous viruses. Religions ave built in self-defense mechanisms too. Like attacking and annihilating anything or one that criticizes it, A.K.A., people like us. We’re the antibodies to it they need to get rid of. Only, I ain’t leaving.

                      Like

                    • I think that’s a great analogy. I also like Daniel Dennett’s analogy of the lancet fluke parasite or the toxoplasma gondii parasite that controls the brain of its host in order for these parasites to lay eggs in other hosts. I love analogies.

                      Like

                    • Me too. Especially ones that ring true like this one does. I’ll find the author’s name of that book and put it here. I highly recommend it.

                      Like

                    • *does happy dance* I found Ray’s lecture from the “God Virus” on YouTube.

                      Jeff, I’m only 5 minutes into the lecture and he’s talking about how preachers and clerics use hypnosis techniques, such as voice roll — same data I shared in my recent post “How I Fell In Love With Jesus”. Oh this is juicy. I’m so glad you brought this to my attention. Again, thank you.

                      Like

                    • No trouble. I’d forgotten I read it. Great stuff. He tells the truth and takes all deference away from religion while doing it. Reading your post brought it to mind.

                      Like

                    • Or parasites and leeches. Same things.

                      Like

                    • I thought it was interesting to note the terminology used with these parasites — that it infects its host in order to continue its life cycle (like mainstream authoritarian religion).

                      I had looked up the book when you mentioned it — Darrel W. Ray is the author.

                      Looks really interesting. Thanks for the recommendation.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      They have blasphemy laws, hell and threats of violence

                      Like

                    • To control and destroy us, the antibodies.

                      Like

                    • I will be doing a post on Mr. Robbins. He won’t like it. It will not be nice, nor will it be pretty, but I’ve found a new meal for this Christmas. Thanks, Mak.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      I can’t wait for that. I know he will run to cry in the loos

                      Like

                    • He’s my kinda meat. He’s a pussy and an idiot and he ain’t gonna like me. Hope he stumbles on what I’m gonna post. I let my prey come to me and they always do. Yummy. This dude has got me PISSED!!!

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      I think I will write a review of it sometime over the weekend if I got time

                      Like

                    • Been reading his reviews and his poetry. His poetry is awful. And his reviews are lazy, idiotic, and based on his schizophrenic supposition that invisible guys exist, christian ones in particular. He really dislikes Dawkins, and I can see why. Dawkins is intelligent and can write intelligently, whereas Robbins writes to entertain himself in an attempt to fain intelligence and mask ignorance at the same time. I’m not bothering to bash him on my blog. He isn’t worthy of my table. His writing sucks, and his ego is too bloated to fit my boiling pot. He should challenge Dawkins or Sam Harris to a debate. He wouldn’t dare, though. They’d hand him his testicles on a fucking bible. I need no invisible deity to justify my revulsion at entities like this guy. The DNA in his body would have been better used in the bodies of maggots, at least they eat carrion and rid the world of rot. This fucker just creates it.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      There have been a few critiques to his post. I dont think he deserves more airtime than he has already got.

                      Like

                    • I wrote a review of his review anyway. I was compelled. And, I gave him a taste of his own medicine.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      I may read the book. I have reread the review am not even sure it is worth spending time critiquing

                      Like

                    • Naw. I took mine down. Wasn’t worth the bother. There’s better stuff to do.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      In deed. A lot better things to do

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      You omitted a conjunction

                      Aren’t they fucking cunning?

                      Like

                    • “You omitted a conjunction.”

                      Hahaha — you’re so fucking right. 😀

                      Like

                    • archaeopteryx1 says:

                      That’s all I wanted, was a conjunction, and I get, “In all seriousness, though” —

                      Like

                    • LOL — maybe you need to work on your come-on lines.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      How did Mormons come to be considered Christians really? They should me called something like Smithians

                      Like

                    • They do not publicly talk about all the facets of their “faith.” They believe in Jesus, and that’s where their public discussion ends on their faith. Mitt Romney would have been booed off the podium had he spent time explaining his “faith” during his run for president. If you’re gonna have a whacky space alien religion, then by god, be proud of it or go away. Mormons like Romney are pussies who know their “faith” would ruin their career if he broadcast it.

                      Like

                    • archaeopteryx1 says:

                      I don’t know why that comment posted, I wasn’t ready for that – I hate WordPress.

                      Anyway, about Schaffer:

                      “In 2007 Schaeffer published his autobiography, Crazy for God: How I Grew Up As One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back, in which he goes into much more detail regarding what it was like to grow up in the Schaeffer family and around L’Abri. In 2011, he published another memoir, called Sex, Mom, and God, in which he discusses growing up with his parents and their role in the rise of the American religious right and argues that the root of the “insanity and corruption” of this force in U.S. politics, and specifically of the religious right’s position on abortion, is a fear of female sexuality.”

                      While you’re at it, check out his Dad. F.A.S. Sr.

                      Like

                    • “I don’t know why that comment posted, I wasn’t ready for that – I hate WordPress.”

                      What do you mean Arch?

                      Like

                    • archaeopteryx1 says:

                      I started a comment in a window marked “Leave a Reply to N℮üґ☼N☮☂℮ṧ” – I went to open a webpage, to get a URL for you, and when I came back, the comment box had been replaced with one that said, “We sure would love to hear your comments, compliments and thoughts,” the generic comment box, so I assumed my comment had posted.

                      I was asking if you had ever heard of an author named Frank A. Schaffer.

                      Like

                    • archaeopteryx1 says:

                      That is SO weird! I took my granddaughter to her piano lesson today, and when she was finished, she showed me his name, written in her composition book by her piano teacher, with she message that she (the piano teacher) wanted me to look him up. When I asked my granddaughter why, she said “You’ll know when you do –” – what does that mean in 8-year-oldese?

                      Now the piano teacher and I have a history. I bought my daughter a piano for Christmas a number of years ago, and the next Christmas, I located a piano teacher, only a few miles away, and prepaid ten lessons for her (my daughter), but years went by, and my daughter never availed herself of them, so I asked if my granddaughter could take the lessons instead.

                      The teacher was attractive, and hey, I’m me, so we began an email conversation. Ultimately, she sent me a URL for a video of how Christians were being fired for their Christian beliefs. I investigated each of the people and their claims, and discovered they had been fired for entirely different reasons, and sent that information to her.

                      She thought my critique interesting, and asked if I thought I could do a similar critique of the Bible. By this time, I had already been several years into “in His own image,” and said, “Sure, I think I might just be able to whip something up!”

                      So I started emailing her a post at a time, and from her responses, it was clear she wasn’t reading any of it. I finally decided we should probably stop emailing, as I was obviously wasting my time. I later learned she truly believed in a 6-day creation!

                      Now, suddenly, there’s this Shaffer thing – I think I’ll grill my granddaughter a little more, if I can find a bright interrogation light and maybe a short length of rubber hose.

                      Like

                    • So I’ve read a couple of articles about Frank Jr. and just wow — how he managed to keep his sanity is beyond me. Talk about nature vs nurture — the effects of the environment he grew up in and how that shaped his view of sex and women. His father was whacked — should have been committed. I just finished reading a 2011 review by Jane Smiley from the Washington Post on Shaffer’s book. Now I’m very intrigued and want to read it, especially in light of the recent SC ruling. But since I was once involved in religious conservative circles, I already know that these men have a subconscious hatred for us “evil” women.

                      I think it is wise to investigate why this piano teacher would be having a conversation about Shaffer with your 8 year old granddaughter and ask her to ask you to look him up. Totally weird indeed.

                      Like

                    • archaeopteryx1 says:

                      I think it is wise to investigate why this piano teacher would be having a conversation about Shaffer with your 8 year old granddaughter and ask her to ask you to look him up. Totally weird indeed.
                      Yup, and as soon as I can find a rubber hose, I’ll get to the “bottom” of this – she had a wry smile (my granddaughter) when she said it. She has been raised “Christian,” I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall during that conversation.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      I think you really should find out more

                      Like

                    • archaeopteryx1 says:

                      I’m trying – I sent the Piano Teacher an email hours ago, and still have had no reply. I’ll keep you updated.

                      Like

                    • I will read further into this. Thanks for the recommendations. I found a PDF from FAS, Sr., and read a little — which is way out there. Seriously, I have yet to meet a religious man who wasn’t effed up in the head about sex. I’ve been listening to an excellent lecture (The God Virus) by Darrel Ray tonight and there is a segment where he’s going to talk about why these men want to control female sexuality. Looking forward to hearing his insights.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      The Twilight movies were Mormon influenced.

                      I didn’t know that.

                      Like

                    • One who’d fly a plane into a building only to find out that that act was indeed the last act he’d ever do. Faith. Nothin’ like it.

                      Like

                    • Surprise, surprise. They’ll never find out it was their last act, but the anticipation (anticipation greatly affects the brain’s reward center) of fucking for eternity made it all worth while.

                      Like

                    • Faith. Oh what a grand and glorious thing.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Nothing like faith. If you have it you can tell a mountain move and it does but you can’t stop a hurricane regardless of how many petitions you make to your specific deity!

                      Like

                    • Yep — not can they grow a amputated limb. Why are faith healer$ in churche$ rather than in a hospital?

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      I need answers to that same question. Why do they pretend to heal people in crusades while they could easily go to a hospital and heal them there and help cut on health bills.
                      This explains my second issue with the narrative character called Jeebus, the creators of the guy claim he could heal, he heals a few guys doesn’t leave the formula and skirts off to space where he hasn’t been seen since nor heard from.

                      Like

                    • The hospitals would have them arrested.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      For taking their business?
                      They can always defer to god

                      Like

                    • You’re assuming they (faith healers) actual really heal people. If that’s the case, and you believe that, I have a beautiful bridge I’m selling in San Francisco. Interested? 😀

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      For all that is reasonable, only a mad man will believe a man who claims to speak for a god. You will keep the bridge 😀

                      Like

                    • I sold it already. Some Christian dude. They’ll believe anything.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Hahaha!
                      Long live my friend. You provide the best entertainment

                      Like

                    • So true, Jeff. Can’t have prophets going after their profits, now can we?

                      Like

                    • No. Just for that, I’m giving you 15 more. There.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Hahaha! I will not take them

                      Like

                    • Listen you! I’m a damn sheikh. You HAVE to do as I say or….invisible totally unsubstantiated shit will happen. Just cause I said so. So there!

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Hahaha!
                      On this I don’t have faith

                      Like

              • magnocrat says:

                These are all labels and can mean almost anything when applied to a person and when applied to a nation they are ridiculous.
                The true nature of a man is manifested in his actions.

                Like

                • archaeopteryx1 says:

                  The true nature of a man is manifested in his actions.

                  Try not – do, or do not.
                  Yoda

                  Like

                • makagutu says:

                  I don’t know what you mean, but Hindus are mostly vegetarian unless you are disputing this.
                  And I said we are not eating atheists, how is that related to nations and not individuals?

                  Like

                  • I put labels on all my canned christian meat that read, “This Canned christian Meat Was Prepared With Love Right In My Kitchen, Just For You.”

                    Like

                  • magnocrat says:

                    Example.
                    A man who attends church but lives how he pleases.
                    A man who lives in what is called a Christian country.
                    A man who tries to be good and help his neighbours but does not believe in a personal God.
                    All of these and many more could be labelled Christian.

                    Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      How would the example you give qualify such for a christian?

                      Like

                    • magnocrat says:

                      There are many such persons who believe they are Christians.
                      The word Christian like the words Hindoo or Moslem or German are merely labels we give to persons or countries they show the dire inaccuracy of language.

                      Like

                    • Or, we could assume people who claim to be Christians, Muslims, Jews, and Hindus, etc, are in fact Christians, Muslims, Jews, and Hindus, etc. Many would considered it quite rude and ignorant to not be called what it is they consider themselves to be. I think what you’re getting at is that people are more than labels. This is very true, but it is not true that labels have no meaning. You can not call someone a Christian simply because they act nicely toward others, many Christians do not do this, but, if someone attends Christian services and defines themselves as Christian, as Christians do, it is incorrect to say they are not. and without labels, we’d never know what was in the can of soup we were opening.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      So I can start calling my Muslim friend Christian because he could actually be one?

                      Like

                    • Good point. This fellow argues from a tower so high it’s hidden in a nebula of unclear purpose. Perhaps it is considered cleaver or wise by him to do such, but, to me a mere mud dwelling animal, it’s just tripe.

                      Like

                    • “This fellow argues from a tower so high it’s hidden in a nebula of unclear purpose.”

                      LMAO — Jeff, you slay me sometimes.

                      Like

                    • Thank you kindly. You should meet my cousin George. He’s British, and he hunts dragons. 😀

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Your family must be an interesting. You sell bridges that only you can see and your brother hunts dragons which am certain only him knows their colour! When can I meet all of you but not your dual self ?

                      Like

                    • I’ll be flying an invisible plane which I borrowed from my sister, Wonder Woman, into your area soon. I’ll let you know when. First two beers are on me.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      I knew it would have to involve things invisible

                      Like

                    • Noel/Jeff — speaking of invisible things — I was looking through my older files in my photobucket this past week and ran across this I had stashed away a few years back.

                      Like

                    • That’s awesome.

                      Like

                    • Figured you’d like that. 😉

                      Like

                    • Santa, IMO, is a much nicer fellow than god. God’s kind of an ass, really. Santa gives you toys. Hurray, Santa!

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Yes, santa is a better fellow except he doesn’t like bad kids

                      Like

                    • Or naughty ones, which counts me out I guess.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Plus you may convert Santa to your favourite dinner dish

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      I only got to know about Santa when I was already old enough to see it as folly. Wish my handlers did that with the god nonsense

                      Like

                    • Listen Buddy, just cause it’s invisible doesn’t mean it ain’t real! Got it?

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Got it. It is invisible to radar you mean but can be touched metaphorically?

                      Like

                    • If you have faith, Brother, anything is real. Amen.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      You were to teach me how to have faith or make me have it with your gun pointed at my head

                      Like

                    • Unfortunately, for guys like me and you, that’s the ONLY way it would work, and even then, we’d only be lying to save our lives. Charlemagne, Holy roman Emperor, used to spread christianity with the sword by saying, “You can join my god, or meet him.” Think I’d sign on the dotted line under that condition, though in private, I wouldn’t believe.

                      Like

                    • I do hope you know I’m kidding, right?

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      I know, very much so

                      Like

                    • That’s good to know, cause I ain’t stoppin’ anytime soon!!!! Hee Haw!!!!!

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Don’t stop. I need a duel self today; one to sleep and another to work

                      Like

                    • Don’t we all pal.

                      Like

                    • I hope George leaves Puff da Magic Dragon alone. Not all dragons are bad, ya know? 😉

                      Like

                    • I’m still angry at Little Jackie Piper for breaking Puff’s heart like that. The little shit!

                      Like

                    • magnocrat says:

                      We call ourselves what ever we wish, but as you are well aware we are all different underneath. Getting to know about a person and seeing how they live is far better than any contrived label.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      On that we are agreed. Getting to know a person is much better than assigning labels

                      Like

                    • Same is true for soup. Better to know it by tasting it first, THEN labeling it. Of course, many who consider themselves chritian etc would quite disagree with their label not being important.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Yes, you taste it and label it onion soup, tomato soup or bone soup. He may not like labels but they are identifiers of groups of persons

                      Like

                    • By which they identify themselves. It is a sign of great disrespect to not acknowledge this. It is hard to know some things however, when one lives aloofly on a tower so high above others he or she can not see them through the clouds of the nebula surrounding them. This brings great sadness, I’d imagine to the one on the tower, sadness, aloofness, and cold, lonely isolation. No wonder some tower dwellers develop a duality of self. They’ve no one else to talk to but themselves.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      I think this puts it in perspective. They live alone in high towers, start hearing voices and imagine they have dual selves.

                      Like

                    • Which they then duel with and….lose their humor. “Why don’t we put a SMILE on that face!?”

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      If by now he ain’t smiling, he is not about to.
                      This thread is so full of hilarity one would be so hung up not to cheer up.

                      Like

                    • magnocrat says:

                      That good absolutely correct. Remember that as you read the newspapers and listen to the news.

                      Like

                    • And nebulous comments that insult because they try SO hard not to. Language is a mother fucker.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Language can fuck us bad. It is however misuse of language is deplorable.

                      Like

                    • True. However, I fuckin’ do love language. It’s given us beautifully expressive words like, fuckin’! Gotta love that!

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Fuck being one of the words with most meanings. Fuck language just for that. Great thing you bet

                      Like

                    • magnocrat says:

                      Language is all we have it can be beautiful in the hands of a poet or dreadful in the mouth of an assassin.
                      Nurture your gift use it to please and uplift but be careful before you flatter.

                      Like

                    • Or falter. My falter was a weirdo. Methinks it was genetic.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Language is all we have it can be beautiful in the hands of a poet or dreadful in the mouth of an assassin.

                      You are right on this one too

                      Like

                    • Speaking of the news, have you been following the breaking story that nothing means anything except something always means something to someone? Crazy shit.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      I missed that news flash

                      Like

                    • Didn’t really mean anything anyway. Nothin’ ever does; until it actually does, I mean. Language what mess. But guys like me would be nothin’ without out, and goals for my dual self too. That bastard. Had a duel with em and he stole my girl friend. BASTARD!!!!

                      Like

                    • Didn’t mean anything any way. Language never means anything until it actually means SOMETHING!

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Haha. Is this what John calls word salad, play of words to make them lose any form of meaning

                      Like

                    • Only if you’re talking about words that might mean something later but not now and then only to every other person who reads them.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Hahah. Now am officially confused.

                      Like

                    • Join the club! I was born confused and will die that way. Confusing as that may sound. Read Hamlet my friend. Better yet, see it. The questions it raises are right up your proverbial alley.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      My interest is piqued. I will read it once I am done reading A happy death.

                      Like

                    • magnocrat says:

                      News is by nature only what we hold to be remarkable and which does not normally happen. It has a serious flaw in that readers believe it to be widespread. So when they read of a murder they believe they are quite common. The rushes wave by the river the grass grows the apples ripen and the bees are busy attending the flowers, but none of this is news.
                      ‘The Pedigree of Honey
                      Does not concern the Bee—
                      A Clover, any time, to him,
                      Is Aristocracy— ‘

                      Like

                    • “Words. words! words.” Hamlet to Polonius.

                      Like

                    • magnocrat says:

                      When Hamlet said that he was very depressed over the death of his father who he idolised. He also saw through Polonius who was a stuffed shirt believing himself to be much greater than he was.

                      Like

                    • Yes. He was toying with Polonius. He did not say it out of a depression for his father’s death, but because he had need to make Polonius think he was mad. If you think he was faking his madness and not truly mad that is. All depends on how you see it, like life. “True wit is nature to advantage dressed/ What oft was thought but ne’er so well expressed.” Alexander Pope.

                      Like

                    • magnocrat says:

                      Your noble son is mad.
                      Mad call I it; for, to define true madness,
                      What is’t but to be nothing else but mad?
                      Thinking about this quote maybe Polonius was really quite smart yet there was something stupid about him. He is rather like me.

                      Like

                    • Yep. Polonius tells that to Claudius and Gertrude right after the scene we’ve been discussing. Many great versions of this play on film exist. My favorite is Ken Branagh’s. Richard Burton’s is excellent too, and I enjoyed Zeffirelli’s with Mel Gibson. Great question of the play is, is Hamlet faking madness for Polonius’ sake and the sake of the King and Queen, or is he truly mad? Can’t go by Polonius, he’s, how did you put it, “a stuffed shirt”. Since you left just this quote from Polonius, I take it you assume Hamlet’s truly mad. How much confidence do you put in Polonius’ opinion on this? Most would greatly disagree with you. Doesn’t mean you’re wrong. But for me, the play works better if Hamlet’s faking. “Madness in great one’s must not unwatched go!” Claudius, as he’s about to send Hamlet on a one way trip to England.

                      Like

                    • magnocrat says:

                      I have only heard cd version and read the play a few times.
                      Hamlet is too honest for his own good I do not think he was born to last too long in this world.
                      To be exceptionally straightforward is a sort of madness. Some of those types escape destruction but many find the world too much for them.
                      Those who throw themselves on the alter for justice like Jesus Christ are soon crucified.
                      He had the great disadvantage of being kingly better to be a pawn in an obscure corner.

                      Like

                    • Wouldn’t say you’re stupid. Especially if you can see through Polonius’ B.S.

                      Like

                    • magnocrat says:

                      Labels change with time and people call themselves whatever they wish. In England anyone who goes around doing good could come in for the label Christian. The word itself is has such a broad meaning that it is almost meaningless. Language is treacherous.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Then we may have to define who a christian is in common usage

                      Like

                    • People who call themselves such. Catholics, Lutherans, etc. It is offensive to not call them as they see themselves. It is an erroneous over-generalization to not call them what they identify themselves as. Groups of people born and raised in France, are French people. This is not derogatory. It is asinine and self-aggrandizing to assume you know more about someone than what they wish to be known as. I know no Catholic who doesn’t consider his or her self a Catholic. Yes. People are more than this. Language is entirely necessary. It makes us an animal known as human, whether it be sign language, spoken language, or written language. It is only those fixated on sadness and the duality of man who can not see this. That makes me sad for them, as they fail to see the joy in being human. (BTW, claiming I have, or anyone has, a “duel” nature” when I know I don’t. is labeling me according to the labeler’s standard, and I find it a highly offensive use of language). Insisting I am that which I am not is offensive, not calling a group of Catholics who consider themselves Catholic, Catholic. Intent is what matters.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      I like your use of duel person!
                      We are in agreement on the rest. A muslim would not be happy to be called an atheist

                      Like

                    • No. They would be deeply offended. Like it or not, language matters. It’s flawed, but it is all we have. Clearly, people are many things. We’re complex animals. But animals nonetheless. If someone wishes to believe they are of a duel nature, then by all means, they are what they think, but I’m not. As well, there seems to be so much sadness, anger, and lack of compassion for others within those claiming this duality within them. Yes, the world has many bad things in it, but if we pooled our resources to make better the here and now and the future, rather than pour energy into a “duel” nature of some sort, we could fix much of what’s wrong. At least, that’s my thought on it. So much pain and unneeded struggle resides in the those thinking they are more than one. But, if that’s what floats their boat, and who they wanna be, so be it. Just don’t bloody include me or anyone else in their definition of how they see themselves who do not consider this to be an accurate description of who they are. THAT is a deeply insulting use of language, and an over generalization in its purest for.

                      Like

                    • makagutu says:

                      Maybe duality makes it hard to be happy. One side tries to be happy, the other can’t, who knows?

                      Like

                    • Good point. Duality brings sadness, and lots of voices in one’s head from people who aren’t really there.

                      Like

                    • magnocrat says:

                      You will find that very difficult the Church of England has thirty nine articles.
                      My advice would be to leave that alone and take men and women as you find them.

                      Like

                    • Or, as what they claim to be. You are deeply insulting millions of people. I know you aren’t trying to do that, but you are. You’re use of language is poor.

                      Like

                    • magnocrat says:

                      I’m polishing my use all the time by reading and study, but I fear I have no very astounding gifts; its the best I can do.

                      Like

                    • And that, as the spider said to the fly, is the end of that. Yummy, yum, yum, yum! Or, as the say in Canada, “He shoots. He SCORES!!!!!”

                      Like

                    • magnocrat says:

                      After the bulls eye there is nothing left to strive for.

                      Like

                    • Sure there is. The net, pal. One can never score enough goals! HE SCORES!!!! It’s a hat trick!!!

                      Like

                    • magnocrat says:

                      One mans triumph is anther mans disaster.

                      Like

                    • That’s how the guy felt who brought King Kong to New York. Talk about a good/bad day!

                      Like

                    • magnocrat says:

                      When competition dies in the heart of man what live on from day to day.

                      When to the sessions of sweet silent thought
                      I summon up remembrance of things past,
                      I sigh the lack of many a thing I sought,
                      And with old woes new wail my dear time’s waste:
                      Then can I drown an eye, unused to flow,
                      For precious friends hid in death’s dateless night,
                      And weep afresh love’s long since cancell’d woe,
                      And moan the expense of many a vanish’d sight:
                      Then can I grieve at grievances foregone,
                      And heavily from woe to woe tell o’er
                      The sad account of fore-bemoaned moan,
                      Which I new pay as if not paid before.
                      But if the while I think on thee, dear friend,
                      All losses are restored and sorrows end.

                      Like

                    • Except when it comes to soup labels. Hate to not know what’s in the can. BTW, you are offending many christians with your over generalizing of them. Come off the tower and play in the sand with the rest of the kids. It’s OK. They won’t bite. Much.

                      Like

                    • magnocrat says:

                      Soup labels I will accept but you never know what the soup is like until you taste it. You want me to play with words when I’ve spent my life tussling with them to get some sort of sense out of life. You play I’ll stay.

                      Like

                    • Do you promise? I like to play.

                      Like

            • Amen. Love always, Sheikh Pontificatius, the Unshaven.

              Like

    • makagutu says:

      Do you mean yo say man has freedom of will to be other than he is? Are you alluding to some fruit? And a garden

      Like

  8. nannus says:

    The defining property of humans, I think, is creativity, or openness. That is the ability to get out of the scope of any fixed description. There are some natural structures in each of us, but they only form a starting point. We can change them and develop out of them. We do so individually, but we also do so collectively, as cultures. If you look at the actually very different cultures of humans across space and time, I think it would be extremely difficult to really identify a “human nature”: The only people you will find who do not have a culture are newborn babies. There is no adult human being that is not strongly reshaped by culture and creativity. Even if certain “traits” occur again and again, they might still be cultural. Our ecological niche is to invent new and novel things. With other words, we don’t have a fixed ecological niche.

    Like

    • makagutu says:

      Nannus this is really full of great insights. If I don’t misunderstand you, is it safe to say that apart from nurture a person also becomes, that is he creates himself so to speak

      Like

      • nannus says:

        Yes, I think so. In my opinion, what distinguishes humans from other animals is that our cognition is “reprogrammable” to a large extent. While other animals have a restricted worldview hardwired into their brains, with varying, but limited plasticity, in humans, the plasticity became the main feature. We de-specialized and developed culture instead. There are innate structures (e.g. a newborn baby knows how to suck milk) but these are only the starting point for the learning process. Even if there is something like instinct, it can be re-formed by culture and individual biography to a large extent.

        Like

  9. Noel, haven’t found it yet, but I have the study somewhere in my extensive file (may be on my older computer) where female mice were subjected to stress during gestation. Their offspring had developed larger hindbrains (fight or flight) and smaller forebrains in comparison to pregnant mice who were not subjected to stress during gestation.

    And here’s some recent research that suggests we can be affected by trauma, stress and abuse that our female ancestors experienced:

    “According to the new insights of behavioral epigenetics, traumatic experiences in our past, or in our recent ancestors’ past, leave molecular scars adhering to our DNA.”

    http://discovermagazine.com/2013/may/13-grandmas-experiences-leave-epigenetic-mark-on-your-genes

    Women have traditionally been treated like shit throughout recorded history. Seeing studies like this is one of the reasons why I know that the Abrahamic god, who deemed women as property and with less rights than slaves, was a sham. Devalue and mistreat females and/or force them to have more children than they can take care of (nurture) and it will affect the genes of future generations.

    Tell that to the idiots who think women’s reproductive health is unimportant. Also, there are few cultures that actually offer parental education. I don’t know of any that makes parental education mandatory, especially in relation to the importance of attachment and brain development

    Like

    • makagutu says:

      This is quite an interesting study.
      We need to learn how to live with each other without causing any psychological damages.
      Thank you for the links you provide.

      Like

  10. themodernidiot says:

    You nurture according to the nature around you, thus building your nature that influences how you nurture. This is applicable to all things living. Existence is circular and trying to separate the two is nothing but rhetoric.

    And you have to include sociology with the psychology. But frankly, neither actually know for sure.

    Like

  11. Tish Farrell says:

    And then in the famous words of the great British poet Philip Larkin:
    “They fxxx you up, your mum and dad.
    They may not mean to, but they do.
    They fill you with the faults they had
    And add some extra, just for you.”

    Just thought I’d throw this in for good measure. Didn’t include the rest of the poem as it’s rather dispiriting. But then on the other hand, there is in my experience, a great lack of ‘nurture’ in very many families in particular, and human societies in general, this quite apart from dominant culture dictates that stunt both deviation from the ‘agreed norm’ and any inclination to imagination that strives to think outside the system. In anthropological/archaeological terms human beings tend to be conservative – to want to keep things THE SAME. This probably has a great deal to answer for…

    Like

    • Well said, Tish. Many cultures throughout history and today have gotten it ass backwards. Cultures that devalue females, devalue care giving, (hello Supreme Court) and religions that cursed birth and motherhood (punishment) in holy books (Genesis 3:16) are paying the price — and all our species is exposed to the fallout. Care giving encompasses a lot, not just one primary care giver and expecting her/him to have the necessary skills for the duration of 18+ years without any education.

      Hilary Clinton was right “It takes a village”. The Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University and the vast amount of research, agrees. But if people are not willing to change — and for so many, prefer to rely on 2000+ year old books as the perfect guidebook to raise their children — NOT — well need I say more. The proof is in the pudding.

      Like

      • Tish Farrell says:

        What a brilliant little video, Victoria. Every civil servant/politician/corporate CEO/religious leader in the world should made to watch it until they are prepared to help put this into action. Five minutes of wisdom to unpick millions of lives in misery. Many thanks for alerting me to this.

        Like

        • Tish, thanks so much for your supportive feedback and for taking the time to watch the video. If only everyone got as excited as we do. The problem I see is that politicians, corporate CEOs and religious leaders don’t see value in this because they can’t see themselves making a profit. If implemented, the pay-offs for our species are huge, but if there is little sickness, disease, crime, drug abuse, war and mental illness, their profits would go out the window. So I don’t see this being implemented any time soon. But I digress (sorry Noel).

          Like

    • magnocrat says:

      Don’t worry things have a habit of changing with the climate just when we are nice and cosy. Its a good job we are firmly incharge or who knows what might happen. Still if the worst come to the worst I can rely on Mum and dad to have passed on the right DNA for my survival. I only hope I don’t have to kill too many to stay alive.

      Like

    • makagutu says:

      I like the poem

      They fuck you up, your mum and dad.
      They may not mean to, but they do.
      They fill you with the faults they had
      And add some extra, just for you.

      But they were fucked up in their turn
      By fools in old-style hats and coats,
      Who half the time were soppy-stern
      And half at one another’s throats.

      Man hands on misery to man.
      It deepens like a coastal shelf.
      Get out as early as you can,
      And don’t have any kids yourself.

      Like

  12. Eric Alagan says:

    Nature as in hard carbon. Nurture as in whether he becomes a glittering diamond – or remains a lump of carbon

    Like

  13. aguywithoutboxers says:

    I feel that man is a product of both nurture and nature. I personally know of twins raised in separate institutions and reunited when they were in their mid-20s. They shared similar characteristics outside their physical resemblance. Good question, my Nairobi brother!

    Like

  14. vastlycurious.com says:

    Quite the broad question but nice that you have listed off of atheism for a change. We are nurtured, despite genetics, which are secondary in most cases. We are, who we became , between 2-4 years old. So many studies on this. ****** If nature thrusts us into poverty of course our path is altered, but so few are influenced enough to change a personal projectory or society as a whole, or a village. . I am glad it is difficult to influence the course of evolution. Very provocative Maku, now I will read the comments. : )))))~

    Like

    • makagutu says:

      The comments have been very enlightening.
      Thanks for always finding time to visit.
      Once in a while it is important to have conversations about things that matter instead of talking about whether ghosts are real or not.

      Like

  15. Sonel says:

    That is a tough and a great question my friend. I think we are who we think we are. We all create what we want in some way. It confuses me most of the times, so I don’t think about it. 😀

    Like

We sure would love to hear your comments, compliments and thoughts.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s