Yamaha acquisition, market dominance & price hikes

[DunedinDragon]

Lol. Thanks. Way to induce a great feeling of pathetic depression this morning. So sad. And they all think ignorance is funny! What the hell are young people taught today?

 

Technically speaking, those students clearly not stupid....just distracted.  And there's certainly a lot of truth in how the educational system revises curricula in an effort to make it "better" and in fact, end up making it much, much worse.

 

The way I look at it, "stupid" is something you're born with and can't help, and is something any decent person would be compassionate about.

 

"Ignorance" on the other hand is a choice one makes.  You might think of it as intellectual laziness.  In any case, you "choose" to be ignorant......kinda like the guy that shows up on this forum asking questions that's clearly covered in the manual....oops....did I that that???!!!  I thought I was only thinking it.....  :o

[HonestOpinion]

How to take standardized tests, which is laughably regarded "proof" that they've learned something, and therfore that their teachers must have "done their jobs". We'd like an extra $12 million in the budget next year, please....our pensions are feeling a little light. Vote 'yes', because after all it's "for the children".

Actually many teachers abhor the way standardized testing, not necessarily a bad thing in limited doses and implemented correctly, has replaced real learning and the teaching of critical thinking with rote memorization. Granted teaching is an art and science that can bear improvement and there are some bad teachers being protected by tenure but overall I believe the failure to educate well lies primarily in the wholesale effort to defund the public education system although that is definitely not the sole problem, we still spend a lot of money on teaching. In response to rapidly declining quality of life issues, a justifiably profound distrust of the political class, and amidst increasing stress about a corporate culture that puts people last, a populist movement has developed that actively reviles science and is profoundly anti-intellectual. "Stupid is good, you can trust stupid and have a beer with it".  Scapegoating teachers is not the answer.

 

You commonly see people arguing that what should be taught is what they "feel", scientific method and fact take a back seat to moronic proclamations repeated ad infinitum in an echo chamber. The long-term effects of this are so visible in a populace that is now easily fooled by so many empty platitudes on both sides of the political aisle. It is more difficult to place blame on people when they have intentionally not even been taught rudimentary methods about how to analyze rhetoric and statistics. It makes them incredibly vulnerable to manipulation for power and profit. I would be the first to argue that science needs to be tempered by philosophy but that does not justify the wholesale rejection of reason in favor of personal superstition. Just 'cause all your neighbors say something, don't make it so.

 

Oh, and btw, just in case we strayed off-topic, "Helix"  ;)

[bjnette]

Hope HElix drops the price or keeps it the same so I can get one soon.

 

Now for some fodder to create some social commentary music about.

 

Ever watch a TV sitcom and feel less intelligent for it?

 

Evidence of deliberate dumbing down through Education is undeniable if you look at literacy levels over the past 100 year.

 

Here is one interview;

 

[cruisinon2]

I would be the first to argue that science needs to be tempered by philosophy but that does not justify the wholesale rejection of reason in favor of personal superstition. Just 'cause all your neighbors say something, don't make it so.

I don't think anyone here is advocating for a return to the medieval concepts of the Four Humours, alchemy, or bleeding people with leeches (though as I understand it, the latter is still sometimes used to get the blood flowing back into severed extremities that have been surgically re-attached)...I certainly wasn't. Nor was I "scapegoating teachers". However, their motives (like EVERYONE else's) are not entirely altruistic, it's impossible. Self-interest is hard-wired into human nature. Their performance is directly linked to students' performance on standardized tests. So what do they do? They teach to the test. Is this their fault? No. They have little choice, as their tenure and by extension, their livelihood, depends on it. Much like the medical profession (regrettably my chosen vocation), teachers...no matter how noble their goals upon entering the profession...are plugged into a system that handcuffs them from Day 1, and makes it difficult if not impossible for them to do the job for which they're trained. And why? Because there are lawyers and money involved. It's a wonderful world.

[brue58ski]

Let me clarify. The "stupid" is shown for example in the video above posted by DunedinDragon. That is just one tiny example of it. The "dedicated" to being ignorant, or not understanding is found largely with people that put their faith before evidence. Ignoring facts to cling to outdated notions, you know actual closed minded people.

 

And your drawing similarities to Hitler, and Stalin do not apply for the following reason.

 

Disagreement is welcomed if something is brought to the table that is constructive, or alternative. As long as critical thought, evidence, logic, reason etc are brought to the table, and not just things like faith, and beliefs which are proven to be universally unreliable.  The concept is to take on emergent data, process it, reshape ideas accordingly.. to make the best system for all.  The NLRBE systems are just the closest example that I have come across thus far. I welcome you look it up. If there are things that would be better logically I welcome them be brought to the table.  I felt I needed to address your comment, but I really feel as if I have contributed to derailing this thread enough. Feel free to PM me about if your truly interested.

 

But, I have to say, that is an odd avatar you have. There is a little chuckle inside each time I see it.

 

There is an amusing story regarding the avatar. It is a bit long.

In regard to NLBRE I also feel the need to address this post. Your statement does not apply for the following reason.

 

There is no disagreement.

 

I don't know what NLBRE is. I was talking about the attitude you portray and not the subject.

"...the stupid, and the dedicated make it all but improbable...The "dedicated" to being ignorant, or not understanding is found largely with people that put their faith before evidence....things like faith, and beliefs which are proven to be universally unreliable."

These blanket generalizations scare me. It implies that anyone that disagrees with you, did so not by using thought or reason but is stupid and ignorant AND of the ignorant, most of them are ignorant because they "put their faith before evidence". So now you're subtly bringing religion into it. Implying that if you have any faith, you are ignorant. Statements like these allow no wiggle room. Which can lead to the attitude that since those that disagree with you are stupid and ignorant, anything they say should just be ignored. After all their stupidity and ignorance impedes any advances all of the "intelligent enlightened" people come up with. The extreme would then be to eliminate them. As Stalin and Hitler did. They are extreme examples to be sure. I often use extremes to make my points clear. Unfortunately by doing that i guess it looks like I'm likening them to you. I apologize for that. That is not my intention. I bring them up because that is where such a generalized narrow attitude can and has led to. I think it's a slippery slope that we have to be careful to not go down.  In regard to the "stupidity" video. I find that people often confuse stupidity with ignorance. What I saw was ignorance. Not knowing something i.e. being ignorant, is not the same as a lack of intelligence. I have no idea how stupid those people are. After all, they made it into an institution of higher learning. Perhaps they were raised in one of the failing public school systems that seems to ber prevalent in this country. Oh well, I guess I'm done hijacking as well. PMing is a good idea. I will start by telling you the avatar story. It is a bit long but I think you will be amused by it. Cheers and peace.

[cruisinon2]

There is an amusing story regarding the avatar. It is a bit long.

In regard to NLBRE I also feel the need to address this post. Your statement does not apply for the following reason.

 

There is no disagreement.

 

I don't know what NLBRE is. I was talking about the attitude you portray and not the subject.

"...the stupid, and the dedicated make it all but improbable...The "dedicated" to being ignorant, or not understanding is found largely with people that put their faith before evidence....things like faith, and beliefs which are proven to be universally unreliable."

These blanket generalizations scare me. It implies that anyone that disagrees with you, did so not by using thought or reason but is stupid and ignorant AND of the ignorant, most of them are ignorant because they "put their faith before evidence". So now you're subtly bringing religion into it. Implying that if you have any faith, you are ignorant. Statements like these allow no wiggle room. Which can lead to the attitude that since those that disagree with you are stupid and ignorant, anything they say should just be ignored. After all their stupidity and ignorance impedes any advances all of the "intelligent enlightened" people come up with. The extreme would then be to eliminate them. As Stalin and Hitler did. They are extreme examples to be sure. I often use extremes to make my points clear. Unfortunately by doing that i guess it looks like I'm likening them to you. I apologize for that. That is not my intention. I bring them up because that is where such a generalized narrow attitude can and has led to. I think it's a slippery slope that we have to be careful to not go down. In regard to the "stupidity" video. I find that people often confuse stupidity with ignorance. What I saw was ignorance. Not knowing something i.e. being ignorant, is not the same as a lack of intelligence. I have no idea how stupid those people are. After all, they made it into an institution of higher learning. Perhaps they were raised in one of the failing public school systems that seems to ber prevalent in this country. Oh well, I guess I'm done hijacking as well. PMing is a good idea. I will start by telling you the avatar story. It is a bit long but I think you will be amused by it. Cheers and peace.

Well said.

[Lachdanan0121]

There is an amusing story regarding the avatar. It is a bit long.

In regard to NLBRE I also feel the need to address this post. Your statement does not apply for the following reason.

 

There is no disagreement.

 

I don't know what NLBRE is. I was talking about the attitude you portray and not the subject.

"...the stupid, and the dedicated make it all but improbable...The "dedicated" to being ignorant, or not understanding is found largely with people that put their faith before evidence....things like faith, and beliefs which are proven to be universally unreliable."

These blanket generalizations scare me. It implies that anyone that disagrees with you, did so not by using thought or reason but is stupid and ignorant AND of the ignorant, most of them are ignorant because they "put their faith before evidence". So now you're subtly bringing religion into it. Implying that if you have any faith, you are ignorant. Statements like these allow no wiggle room. Which can lead to the attitude that since those that disagree with you are stupid and ignorant, anything they say should just be ignored. After all their stupidity and ignorance impedes any advances all of the "intelligent enlightened" people come up with. The extreme would then be to eliminate them. As Stalin and Hitler did. They are extreme examples to be sure. I often use extremes to make my points clear. Unfortunately by doing that i guess it looks like I'm likening them to you. I apologize for that. That is not my intention. I bring them up because that is where such a generalized narrow attitude can and has led to. I think it's a slippery slope that we have to be careful to not go down. In regard to the "stupidity" video. I find that people often confuse stupidity with ignorance. What I saw was ignorance. Not knowing something i.e. being ignorant, is not the same as a lack of intelligence. I have no idea how stupid those people are. After all, they made it into an institution of higher learning. Perhaps they were raised in one of the failing public school systems that seems to ber prevalent in this country. Oh well, I guess I'm done hijacking as well. PMing is a good idea. I will start by telling you the avatar story. It is a bit long but I think you will be amused by it. Cheers and peace.

Well said. And I dont disagree with much, but with your reply, I still see you might not be understanding it fully.

 

About faith and religion. If you disregard reason. If you disregard a fact ( which is universally correct ) or evidence, to stay more "true" to make believe. Then you are being willfully ignorant, or stupid, as the lines blur at that point. And for thousands of years they have been forcing it down everyone's throat. This is not the exception with religion, its all but a rule. We are expected to respect their beliefs no matter how ridiculous, yet they can disregard any facts that contradict their faith. And they are praised when they do it. Its down right hypocrisy, and nothing short of keeping the bar low to coddle ignorance. Which if continued its easy to see how we can flow right into oblivion.

 

We do not intend to achieve any of this thru force. War will never have an end that way. But it does require people to start growing up especially with people in fields of the utmost importance. ( speaking as a species) This is not narrow-minded. This is observing the reality of now, and our history.

 

So I am implying, or saying blatantly rather... That if you put your faith before established facts, then it is you who is being narrow minded.  Faith before critical thought is the basis for 90% of the woes around the world.  Not just faith in a religion or god, But faith defined as the purposeful suspension of critical thought, which it is. Much like Stalin, whose State-ism was the same as religion and required utmost "faith" in the path he has chosen, and for him to be seen as a god king in his own right.  Or Hitler, who had his BD celebrated by the Vatican, and the majority of his officers and soldiers were catholic. The church even financed his army. He required utmost faith in his directions from his officers and his nazi army.   To bring them in the table these facts must be observed.  Matter of fact it is happening now in N Korea. The people must have faith in their leader, and all but see him as a god, or prophet, etc. Without the faith of the followers... Hitler, or Stalin would have never had the power they did. 

 

With money you can get into higher learning institutions, which prolly shows some of the problem.  And being distracted from their mountains of student debt. In addition to the failing public schools systems you mention. As far as stupid, or ignorant in the video. You are correct. I was generalizing them as stupid, but ignorant is more accurate.  I always welcome higher precision, or accuracy if I am wrong.  Although maybe not "at first" in an argument, or discussion. lol I mean I am still human.  :P

 

I mean no offense to anyone here if it is taken that way. 

 

But yes, pm me next time. Start with that avatar.

EDIT: Nevermind I see you did PM me, and even started with the avatar lol.  I didn't see the PM notification on the phone when I was typing and posting this post here on this thread. Sorry I am still a bit new to smart phones. But I have already typed so much in it, with decent information that I don't want to delete the post lol. Oh well, any not interested in this post can just skip over it.  :P

 

I promise I won't post anything else here about it.  Prolly won't post in the thread at all, cause I really don't have anything to add to the original subject. 

[HonestOpinion]

We'd like an extra $12 million in the budget next year, please....our pensions are feeling a little light. Vote 'yes', because after all it's "for the children".

I agree that "it's for the children" can be easily exploited for personal gain and that there are also teachers and policies being protected by the teacher's union that perhaps shouldn't be. What is really going on though is an effort to completely privatize the educational system and in the process to most likely deprive teachers of collective bargaining rights, decent wages, healthcare, workplace protection, and of course pensions. Apologies for dragging this on. I know people have mixed feelings about unions but the teacher's union like the Post Office is one of the last strong unions left in the country and as a result is under deliberate and constant attack. The anti-teacher rhetoric is definitely gaining traction. Whether people like the public education system or the Post Office they employ millions of people as they are required in every Zip-Code in the nation. Both of these institutions still pay living wages, have benefits, job security, and pensions. I don't think it is any coincidence that they also both have two of the last remaining strong unions.

 

Unions have been systematically dismantled over the last 30 years. Greedy folks have been quite busy manipulating the anti-union sentiment out there that has been so carefully cultivated and promoted for the past few decades. A pension used to be something many Americans could count on after a lifetime of work; not any more. Pensions are pretty much gone in the private sector and now they are going after pensions in the public sector as well. The irony is once they eliminated pensions in the private sector now people who work in that sector understandably no longer want to pay for public sector pensions. A wild success on this front for people who would prefer that money go to shareholders and company executive bonuses. There are those who will not be happy until everyone is making MacDonalds level wages and living in a box under a bridge when they hit retirement age. Whether or not people think "union" is a dirty word there has to be some kind of mechanism or institution for workers to get a fair shake or we all end up as one individual struggling against corporations answering only to their shareholders and hiding behind armies of lawyers and sympathetic courts and politicians.

 

 

I don't think anyone here is advocating for a return to the medieval concepts of the Four Humours, alchemy, or bleeding people with leeches (though as I understand it, the latter is still sometimes used to get the blood flowing back into severed extremities that have been surgically re-attached)...I certainly wasn't. Nor was I "scapegoating teachers". However, their motives (like EVERYONE else's) are not entirely altruistic, it's impossible. Self-interest is hard-wired into human nature. Their performance is directly linked to students' performance on standardized tests. So what do they do? They teach to the test. Is this their fault? No. They have little choice, as their tenure and by extension, their livelihood, depends on it. Much like the medical profession (regrettably my chosen vocation), teachers...no matter how noble their goals upon entering the profession...are plugged into a system that handcuffs them from Day 1, and makes it difficult if not impossible for them to do the job for which they're trained. And why? Because there are lawyers and money involved. It's a wonderful world.

Thanks for the clarification and I think I understand your position. You may not be advocating for a return to the "Four Humours" but the anti-reason, anti-science movement that has considerable momentum right now clearly is and I think it is important to clarify comments that might inadvertently feed into that narrative. Their tactics definitely include constant attacks on what books and ideas should be taught, getting rid of and defunding public education, and ultimately direct attacks on teachers and their union.

 

Consider the "scapegoating teachers" comment as being directed out into the ether not at you as this was clearly not your intention. I just wanted to make the point that many teachers I have spoken with feel exactly as you do. They loath standardized testing, "feel handcuffed" by it, and as you say are forced to teach to it as their job security, promotions, raises, and bonuses are directly linked to their students performance on these tests. Methods to objectively measure teachers' and students' performance may be necessary but I think we both agree there has to be a better and more nuanced way than the current stultifying implementation of standardized testing to spot, retain, and reward the good teachers, get rid of the bad ones and simultaneously ensure students are not only getting a base-level education but also developing the skills for critical and creative thinking.  Leaving school with every student only able to regurgitate all the same answers to a standardized test does not qualify as comprehensive learning and in no way prepares people for the world.

 

As always I have nothing but respect for the humor and point of view you bring to this forum and your ability to say in a few concise and usually highly entertaining words what takes me many paragraphs to express.

 

Anyway, back to my no politics on the L6 forum policy I try to adhere to. Apologies to the OP for the digression.

[BillBee]

<snip>

 

So I am implying, or saying blatantly rather... That if you put your faith before established facts, then it is you who is being narrow minded.  Faith before critical thought is the basis for 90% of the woes around the world.  Not just faith in a religion or god, But faith defined as the purposeful suspension of critical thought, which it is. Much like Stalin, whose State-ism was the same as religion and required utmost "faith" in the path he has chosen, and for him to be seen as a god king in his own right.  Or Hitler, who had his BD celebrated by the Vatican, and the majority of his officers and soldiers were catholic. The church even financed his army. He required utmost faith in his directions from his officers and his nazi army.   To bring them in the table these facts must be observed.  Matter of fact it is happening now in N Korea. The people must have faith in their leader, and all but see him as a god, or prophet, etc. Without the faith of the followers... Hitler, or Stalin would have never had the power they did. 

 

<snip>

 

I mean no offense to anyone here if it is taken that way. 

<snip>

 

Now that my man is probably the biggest flaw in "self-styled" critical thinkers. Blanket statements regarding trust, faith, fear and politics to be nuzzled under the term fact. Nietzsche - There are no facts, only interpretations.

 

No offense taken from this narrow minded Lutheran :D

[brue58ski]

Well said. And I dont disagree with much, but with your reply, I still see you might not be understanding it fully.

 

About faith and religion. If you disregard reason. If you disregard a fact ( which is universally correct ) or evidence, to stay more "true" to make believe. Then you are being willfully ignorant, or stupid, as the lines blur at that point. And for thousands of years they have been forcing it down everyone's throat. This is not the exception with religion, its all but a rule. We are expected to respect their beliefs no matter how ridiculous, yet they can disregard any facts that contradict their faith. And they are praised when they do it. Its down right hypocrisy, and nothing short of keeping the bar low to coddle ignorance. Which if continued its easy to see how we can flow right into oblivion.

 

We do not intend to achieve any of this thru force. War will never have an end that way. But it does require people to start growing up especially with people in fields of the utmost importance. ( speaking as a species) This is not narrow-minded. This is observing the reality of now, and our history.

 

So I am implying, or saying blatantly rather... That if you put your faith before established facts, then it is you who is being narrow minded.  Faith before critical thought is the basis for 90% of the woes around the world.  Not just faith in a religion or god, But faith defined as the purposeful suspension of critical thought, which it is. Much like Stalin, whose State-ism was the same as religion and required utmost "faith" in the path he has chosen, and for him to be seen as a god king in his own right.  Or Hitler, who had his BD celebrated by the Vatican, and the majority of his officers and soldiers were catholic. The church even financed his army. He required utmost faith in his directions from his officers and his nazi army.   To bring them in the table these facts must be observed.  Matter of fact it is happening now in N Korea. The people must have faith in their leader, and all but see him as a god, or prophet, etc. Without the faith of the followers... Hitler, or Stalin would have never had the power they did. 

 

With money you can get into higher learning institutions, which prolly shows some of the problem.  And being distracted from their mountains of student debt. In addition to the failing public schools systems you mention. As far as stupid, or ignorant in the video. You are correct. I was generalizing them as stupid, but ignorant is more accurate.  I always welcome higher precision, or accuracy if I am wrong.  Although maybe not "at first" in an argument, or discussion. lol I mean I am still human.  :P

 

I mean no offense to anyone here if it is taken that way. 

 

But yes, pm me next time. Start with that avatar.

EDIT: Nevermind I see you did PM me, and even started with the avatar lol.  I didn't see the PM notification on the phone when I was typing and posting this post here on this thread. Sorry I am still a bit new to smart phones. But I have already typed so much in it, with decent information that I don't want to delete the post lol. Oh well, any not interested in this post can just skip over it.  :P

 

I promise I won't post anything else here about it.  Prolly won't post in the thread at all, cause I really don't have anything to add to the original subject. 

 

All right, once more into the breach. Mainly because of the "I still see you might not be understanding it fully." I am going public one more time.

 

I'm not sure what you think I don't understand fully. It sounds like it is you that does not understand fully what my point is. Nothing you have said negates it.

 

I knew when you subtly brought religion into this where you stood in regard to religion or any kind of faith.  And let's not continue to dance around what faith you are mostly referring to anymore. It's Christianity.  This statement says it all..."And for thousands of years they have been forcing it down everyone's throat. This is not the exception with religion, its all but a rule." I cannot deny that things have been forced down peoples throats. But that's true with just about every point of view developed by humans. For thousands of years, thousands of point's of views have been shoved down peoples throats. The Romans killed Christians for sport for awhile because the Romans were forcing there beliefs down everyone's throat. The Nazis, theirs. In public schools today, there is a certain morality being "forced down everyone's throats" that doesn't match the morality of many other people. Which is right? No comment. Not trying to make a statement one way or another. My point is not to debate the morality of public schools but that it ain't just religions that have been and are forcing their own points of view down other peoples throats. Indoctrinating people into their way of thinking that many people don't believe. But none of this actually has anything to do with my point. Other than you kind of make it sound like you would like to force your belief in NLBRE down everyone's throat since it is so "obviously" the right thing

 

Regarding whether your statements are narrow minded. The statement of "This is not the exception with religion, its all but a rule" leaves no wiggle room as far as I can tell. Which makes it a very narrow minded statement. This also applies to your the stupid, and the dedicated make it all but improbable statement. That's a broad statement? And as a rule,  I know of no law that forces people to attend any kind of religious ceremony or service these days.  I live in what is one of the most extremely liberal parts of this country. And am surrounded by people that do not believe what I believe. I am the minority. Sounds like you are in the same situation only the opposite. I can assure you that everything you have been accusing Christian faith and religion of, I have experienced in the opposite direction here. Including having other beliefs forced down my throat. You stated "they can disregard any facts that contradict their faith.". The same can be said about the people around me in regard to facts that support a faith.

 

And WOW! Bringing up the Catholic church with Nazis! Where did that come from. You sure are loaded for bear. Let's start with this. What the Catholics did or didn't do then has nothing to do with what I'm trying to say. It is your attitude that scares me. It is the same as the Nazis. No matter who did or didn't supported them. relates in NO way to what I am talking about. You seem to be completely missing my point. No matter who did what with the Nazis, the I'm right and you're wrong attitude had everything to do with what happened there. And is the same attitude that you seem to have. This Catholic/Nazi subject itself would require at least a night and a couple of beers. Your "the majority of his officers and soldiers were Catholic." is really out there. I do feel the need to address this but again, it has nothing to do with my point. Many of the officers and soldiers may have been raised Catholic/Christian but I can assure you that when the Nazi's were in full swing, not a lot of them attended church.

Here is one reference from a study on Hitler himself.

   In Hitler's eyes, Christianity was a religion fit only for slaves; he detested its ethics in particular. Its teaching, he declared, was a rebellion against the natural law of selection by struggle and the survival of the fittest.

    —?Extract from Hitler: a Study in Tyranny, by Alan Bullock

 

Some Hitler quotes.

“Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure.â€

“So it’s not opportune to hurl ourselves now into a struggle with the Churches. The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death. A slow death has something comforting about it. The dogma of Christianity gets worn away before the advances of science. Religion will have to make more and more concessions. Gradually the myths crumble. All that’s left is to prove that in nature there is no frontier between the organic and the inorganic.â€

 

Not quite a hearty endorsement. And I'm guessing you probably agree with his "The dogma of Christianity gets worn away before the advances of science." statement.

 

Here's something in regard to your "the majority of his officers and soldiers were catholic." statement that Hitler said.

"I have six divisions of SS composed of men absolutely indifferent in matters of religion. It doesn’t prevent them from going to their deaths with serenity in their souls.â€

 

There's more if you care to look into it. But again, it all has NOTHING to do with my point. But I thought your implications were a bit outrageous and wanted to slightly address them. And remember, he used a lot of what the theory of evolution is about to justify much of what he did. I'm going to guess you don't think that, then, negates that theory.

 

And in regard to faith, couldn't we describe what you think about NLBRE as faith? Isn't that also faith? Isn't it a faith in NLBRE that it's a great thing/idea. You state "Without the faith of the followers... Hitler, or Stalin would have never had the power they did." Wouldn't that also be true about the idea/topic/thing of NLBRE. Doesn't NLBRE require people to have faith in it before it can be operated or implemented? It seems what you are really saying is that those that have faith in anything you don't have faith in"  are wrong. I have tried to cultivate a mentality of acceptance my whole life. Not approval, but the right for everyone to think the way they want to. I am old enough that after thinking about things for a long time I am pretty darn sure in what I believe. I am still open to any other points of view and, believe me, I am often presented with them. If I hear a compelling point of view I will research it and come to my own conclusion. I am surrounded by people that do not think the way I do but they are, mostly (there's always a few) nice, intelligent, caring human beings with their hearts in the right place. I do not for one second think any less of them nor feel I have any right to judge their intelligence because of their lack of belief in what I believe. You don't seem to give people the same respect.

 

So if you don't understand me fully after this then I give up. Again, my fear is not in your belief or faith in what you believe. It is the non acceptance and in fact disdain for those that don't have the same belief and/or faith in NLBRE that you do. And your bold statement that it must be because of stupidity and ignorance of which you say is mostly based on blind faith. It couldn't possibly be because they are intelligent and came to their own conclusions i.e. disagree, could it? The sureness you have about how right you are and how wrong "they" are is disconcerting. And scary. And just to be clear, I still don't know what NLBRE is and have no comment one way or another on it. Although your bringing up of faith and religion leads me to guess that it has some sort of religious or anti religious dogma in it. I promise I will research it when I have time. This was interesting but I'm gonna stop now. I'm guessing there are many that will be pleased to hear that.

[Lachdanan0121]

All right, once more into the breach. Mainly because of the "I still see you might not be understanding it fully." I am going public one more time.

 

I'm not sure what you think I don't understand fully. It sounds like it is you that does not understand fully what my point is. Nothing you have said negates it.

 

I knew when you subtly brought religion into this where you stood in regard to religion or any kind of faith. And let's not continue to dance around what faith you are mostly referring to anymore. It's Christianity. This statement says it all..."And for thousands of years they have been forcing it down everyone's throat. This is not the exception with religion, its all but a rule." I cannot deny that things have been forced down peoples throats. But that's true with just about every point of view developed by humans. For thousands of years, thousands of point's of views have been shoved down peoples throats. The Romans killed Christians for sport for awhile because the Romans were forcing there beliefs down everyone's throat. The Nazis, theirs. In public schools today, there is a certain morality being "forced down everyone's throats" that doesn't match the morality of many other people. Which is right? No comment. Not trying to make a statement one way or another. My point is not to debate the morality of public schools but that it ain't just religions that have been and are forcing their own points of view down other peoples throats. Indoctrinating people into their way of thinking that many people don't believe. But none of this actually has anything to do with my point. Other than you kind of make it sound like you would like to force your belief in NLBRE down everyone's throat since it is so "obviously" the right thing

 

Regarding whether your statements are narrow minded. The statement of "This is not the exception with religion, its all but a rule" leaves no wiggle room as far as I can tell. Which makes it a very narrow minded statement. This also applies to your the stupid, and the dedicated make it all but improbable statement. That's a broad statement? And as a rule, I know of no law that forces people to attend any kind of religious ceremony or service these days. I live in what is one of the most extremely liberal parts of this country. And am surrounded by people that do not believe what I believe. I am the minority. Sounds like you are in the same situation only the opposite. I can assure you that everything you have been accusing Christian faith and religion of, I have experienced in the opposite direction here. Including having other beliefs forced down my throat. You stated "they can disregard any facts that contradict their faith.". The same can be said about the people around me in regard to facts that support a faith.

 

And WOW! Bringing up the Catholic church with Nazis! Where did that come from. You sure are loaded for bear. Let's start with this. What the Catholics did or didn't do then has nothing to do with what I'm trying to say. It is your attitude that scares me. It is the same as the Nazis. No matter who did or didn't supported them. relates in NO way to what I am talking about. You seem to be completely missing my point. No matter who did what with the Nazis, the I'm right and you're wrong attitude had everything to do with what happened there. And is the same attitude that you seem to have. This Catholic/Nazi subject itself would require at least a night and a couple of beers. Your "the majority of his officers and soldiers were Catholic." is really out there. I do feel the need to address this but again, it has nothing to do with my point. Many of the officers and soldiers may have been raised Catholic/Christian but I can assure you that when the Nazi's were in full swing, not a lot of them attended church.

Here is one reference from a study on Hitler himself.

In Hitler's eyes, Christianity was a religion fit only for slaves; he detested its ethics in particular. Its teaching, he declared, was a rebellion against the natural law of selection by struggle and the survival of the fittest.

—?Extract from Hitler: a Study in Tyranny, by Alan Bullock

 

Some Hitler quotes.

“Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure.â€

“So it’s not opportune to hurl ourselves now into a struggle with the Churches. The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death. A slow death has something comforting about it. The dogma of Christianity gets worn away before the advances of science. Religion will have to make more and more concessions. Gradually the myths crumble. All that’s left is to prove that in nature there is no frontier between the organic and the inorganic.â€

 

Not quite a hearty endorsement. And I'm guessing you probably agree with his "The dogma of Christianity gets worn away before the advances of science." statement.

 

Here's something in regard to your "the majority of his officers and soldiers were catholic." statement that Hitler said.

"I have six divisions of SS composed of men absolutely indifferent in matters of religion. It doesn’t prevent them from going to their deaths with serenity in their souls.â€

 

There's more if you care to look into it. But again, it all has NOTHING to do with my point. But I thought your implications were a bit outrageous and wanted to slightly address them. And remember, he used a lot of what the theory of evolution is about to justify much of what he did. I'm going to guess you don't think that, then, negates that theory.

 

And in regard to faith, couldn't we describe what you think about NLBRE as faith? Isn't that also faith? Isn't it a faith in NLBRE that it's a great thing/idea. You state "Without the faith of the followers... Hitler, or Stalin would have never had the power they did." Wouldn't that also be true about the idea/topic/thing of NLBRE. Doesn't NLBRE require people to have faith in it before it can be operated or implemented? It seems what you are really saying is that those that have faith in anything you don't have faith in" are wrong. I have tried to cultivate a mentality of acceptance my whole life. Not approval, but the right for everyone to think the way they want to. I am old enough that after thinking about things for a long time I am pretty darn sure in what I believe. I am still open to any other points of view and, believe me, I am often presented with them. If I hear a compelling point of view I will research it and come to my own conclusion. I am surrounded by people that do not think the way I do but they are, mostly (there's always a few) nice, intelligent, caring human beings with their hearts in the right place. I do not for one second think any less of them nor feel I have any right to judge their intelligence because of their lack of belief in what I believe. You don't seem to give people the same respect.

 

So if you don't understand me fully after this then I give up. Again, my fear is not in your belief or faith in what you believe. It is the non acceptance and in fact disdain for those that don't have the same belief and/or faith in NLBRE that you do. And your bold statement that it must be because of stupidity and ignorance of which you say is mostly based on blind faith. It couldn't possibly be because they are intelligent and came to their own conclusions i.e. disagree, could it? The sureness you have about how right you are and how wrong "they" are is disconcerting. And scary. And just to be clear, I still don't know what NLBRE is and have no comment one way or another on it. Although your bringing up of faith and religion leads me to guess that it has some sort of religious or anti religious dogma in it. I promise I will research it when I have time. This was interesting but I'm gonna stop now. I'm guessing there are many that will be pleased to hear that.

(Shakes head)

I give up my friend. I dont want to waste anymore time with this. So, I will just say this. I know I could be more accepting, and to be fair I should be, and there your point is valid. However, in the big picture that isnt really met in kind. That is where I am just suppose to accept it, while they do not. Typical.

 

Sorry for derailing the thread. Peace!

[Verne-Bunsen]

Everyone knows Hitler struggled to get his guitar tone right. If only there had been a Helix in the bunker!

 

[silverhead]

Would this be a good time to point out that science and religion are equal when it comes to attempting to explain the currently inexplicable?

 

Since the Renaissance scientists have been very effective at developing theories that help us understand physical reality and the 'laws' of nature.The current state of science in trying to understand physical reality comes to a frustrating halt at quantum physics and the nature of matter, energy, and quantum particles at measurements smaller than the Planck values for matter/energy, distance, and time. At that level things are random and chaotic and gravity continues to resist integration with the quantum world. But of course we don't want to accept that 'God rolls dice' or that our human understanding is inherently limited. The most popular current quantum theories for explaining these things involves a cat that is simultaneously dead and alive, with explanations involving strings, M-branes, and multiple parallel universes. By definition, none of these things are observable or testable even in theory. It's not just that we don't have the tools yet.They are theoretically speculative and not subject to proof or disproof - just like other speculative explanations involving God, Allah, Jehovah, Buddha and whatever deity we invoke.

 

Science involves theories that can at least theoretically be disproven by experiment*. Evolution is a scientific theory that has never been disproven - only supported - for several hundred years. Gravity is a highly successful theory but less robust than evolution, with Newton's theories having been modified by Einstein's relativity and the warping of spacetime. But they remain scientific theories because we can, and do, both create experiments to collect relevant data and use the theory to the benefit of humankind (evolution and medicine as well as food, for instance).

 

The softer meaning of 'theory' boils down to speculation and untestable belief. Examples include creationism. life after death, and the glory of martyrdom as well as string theory, M-branes, and multiple universes.

 

... and Oh, yeah - Yamaha sucks just like all big corporations. And Putin because .... well just because. And ISIS too, unless of course you support ISIS.

 

 

* Of course no theory can ever be completely proven - we can just continue to collect evidence that supports rather than disproves a theory. There always remains the possibility that the next experiment will disprove it.

[gkinder]

Would this be a good time to point out that science and religion are equal when it comes to attempting to explain the currently inexplicable?

 

Since the Renaissance scientists have been very effective at developing theories that help us understand physical reality and the 'laws' of nature.The current state of science in trying to understand physical reality comes to a frustrating halt at quantum physics and the nature of matter, energy, and quantum particles at measurements smaller than the Planck values for matter/energy, distance, and time. At that level things are random and chaotic and gravity continues to resist integration with the quantum world. But of course we don't want to accept that 'God rolls dice' or that our human understanding is inherently limited. The most popular current quantum theories for explaining these things involves a cat that is simultaneously dead and alive, with explanations involving strings, M-branes, and multiple parallel universes. By definition, none of these things are observable or testable even in theory. It's not just that we don't have the tools yet.They are theoretically speculative and not subject to proof or disproof - just like other speculative explanations involving God, Allah, Jehovah, Buddha and whatever deity we invoke.

 

Science involves theories that can at least theoretically be disproven by experiment*. Evolution is a scientific theory that has never been disproven - only supported - for several hundred years. Gravity is a highly successful theory but less robust than evolution, with Newton's theories having been modified by Einstein's relativity and the warping of spacetime. But they remain scientific theories because we can, and do, both create experiments to collect relevant data and use the theory to the benefit of humankind (evolution as it applies to medicine and food, for instance).

 

The softer meaning of 'theory' boils down to speculation and untestable belief. Examples include creationism. life after death, and the glory of martyrdom as well as string theory, M-branes, and multiple universes.

 

... and Oh, yeah - Yamaha sucks just like all big corporations. And Putin because .... well just because. And ISIS too, unless of course you support ISIS.

 

 

* Of course no theory can ever be completely proven - we can just continue to collect evidence that supports rather than disproves a theory. There always remains the possibility that the next experiment will disprove it.

 

WELL STATED SIR!!!!!   These religion vs science arguments always make me shake my head a bit since both types of zealots never seem to entertain the notion that BOTH may be right, to a certain extent at least.    Why can't the laws of the physical Universe, space, and time co-exist with God (or whatever word you want to put there)?  Maybe God is the ultimate scientist and physicist?  Closing one's mind to ALL possibilities certainly limits a person's perspective.....

[duncann]

Neil DeGrasse Tyson always has a lot to say about this subject. Second video is pretty long, but listening to him talk, the time goes by quick:

[WickedFinger]

There is an amusing story regarding the avatar. It is a bit long.

In regard to NLBRE I also feel the need to address this post. Your statement does not apply for the following reason.

 

There is no disagreement.

 

I don't know what NLBRE is. I was talking about the attitude you portray and not the subject.

"...the stupid, and the dedicated make it all but improbable...The "dedicated" to being ignorant, or not understanding is found largely with people that put their faith before evidence....things like faith, and beliefs which are proven to be universally unreliable."

These blanket generalizations scare me. It implies that anyone that disagrees with you, did so not by using thought or reason but is stupid and ignorant AND of the ignorant, most of them are ignorant because they "put their faith before evidence". So now you're subtly bringing religion into it. Implying that if you have any faith, you are ignorant. Statements like these allow no wiggle room. Which can lead to the attitude that since those that disagree with you are stupid and ignorant, anything they say should just be ignored. After all their stupidity and ignorance impedes any advances all of the "intelligent enlightened" people come up with. The extreme would then be to eliminate them. As Stalin and Hitler did. They are extreme examples to be sure. I often use extremes to make my points clear. Unfortunately by doing that i guess it looks like I'm likening them to you. I apologize for that. That is not my intention. I bring them up because that is where such a generalized narrow attitude can and has led to. I think it's a slippery slope that we have to be careful to not go down.  In regard to the "stupidity" video. I find that people often confuse stupidity with ignorance. What I saw was ignorance. Not knowing something i.e. being ignorant, is not the same as a lack of intelligence. I have no idea how stupid those people are. After all, they made it into an institution of higher learning. Perhaps they were raised in one of the failing public school systems that seems to ber prevalent in this country. Oh well, I guess I'm done hijacking as well. PMing is a good idea. I will start by telling you the avatar story. It is a bit long but I think you will be amused by it. Cheers and peace.

 

 

Being a long student and scholar of history and a huge fan of reality: Believing in things has nothing to do with them being grounded in reality and physically real. The religious across the spectrum are the first ones to try and act as if science is a belief or requires you to accept it, it exists in contrast to whatever often delusional aspect of psychology that spins in one's mind. Think what you will, believe what you will, everything in human nature is a matter of your personal genetic markers. Nothing more, nothing less, born a with genius potential or retarded, we all are what we are and whether or not you become obsessed with some psychic communication with your imaginary friend does not give anyone the right to castigate science or non believers  because they are not wired that way. 

There have been infinite religions and 10,000 gods in the human epic, the only thing that is common amount all of them is that their believers were utterly certain they were the one and only truth and light. Those who are convinced any religion or belief construction can "save" the world or admit them to disney land after they die is as mistaken now, as they have been then. The dumbing down of our educational system towards a basis of "faith" and "belief" ideology merely assures when we need science and brilliant persons to save is from a dire crisis, they will be busy praying or lighting candles. 

 

Now let's get back to programming the Helix and playing the music we consider a gift. 

[cruisinon2]

Being a long student and scholar of history and a huge fan of reality: Believing in things has nothing to do with them being grounded in reality and physically real. The religious across the spectrum are the first ones to try and act as if science is a belief or requires you to accept it, it exists in contrast to whatever often delusional aspect of psychology that spins in one's mind. Think what you will, believe what you will, everything in human nature is a matter of your personal genetic markers. Nothing more, nothing less, born a with genius potential or retarded, we all are what we are and whether or not you become obsessed with some psychic communication with your imaginary friend does not give anyone the right to castigate science or non believers because they are not wired that way.

There have been infinite religions and 10,000 gods in the human epic, the only thing that is common amount all of them is that their believers were utterly certain they were the one and only truth and light. Those who are convinced any religion or belief construction can "save" the world or admit them to disney land after they die is as mistaken now, as they have been then. The dumbing down of our educational system towards a basis of "faith" and "belief" ideology merely assures when we need science and brilliant persons to save is from a dire crisis, they will be busy praying or lighting candles.

 

Now let's get back to programming the Helix and playing the music we consider a gift.

This is just a guess, but Will Rogers never met you, did he?

[gkinder]

Being a long student and scholar of history and a huge fan of reality: Believing in things has nothing to do with them being grounded in reality and physically real. The religious across the spectrum are the first ones to try and act as if science is a belief or requires you to accept it, it exists in contrast to whatever often delusional aspect of psychology that spins in one's mind. Think what you will, believe what you will, everything in human nature is a matter of your personal genetic markers. Nothing more, nothing less, born a with genius potential or retarded, we all are what we are and whether or not you become obsessed with some psychic communication with your imaginary friend does not give anyone the right to castigate science or non believers  because they are not wired that way. 

There have been infinite religions and 10,000 gods in the human epic, the only thing that is common amount all of them is that their believers were utterly certain they were the one and only truth and light. Those who are convinced any religion or belief construction can "save" the world or admit them to disney land after they die is as mistaken now, as they have been then. The dumbing down of our educational system towards a basis of "faith" and "belief" ideology merely assures when we need science and brilliant persons to save is from a dire crisis, they will be busy praying or lighting candles. 

 

Now let's get back to programming the Helix and playing the music we consider a gift. 

 

While I don't disagree with your premise, the same can be said the other way around about science zealotry.  The arrogance and closed mindedness on that side of the fence is every bit as bad as on the religious side, and just as much based on beliefs or desired outcomes.  On the dumbing down item, with the politicization of science, often pseudo-science, and the barriers to dissenting views/thought science zealots are trying to impose, i.e. global warming, it is pretty hard to throw stones at the religious side when the science side is doing the same thing. 

[isdirg1]

What has this got to do with Helix? The administraters should stop this religious bs.

[isdirg1]

Administrators show some leadership and close this religious BS down. I am a musician not some believer of an unknown being.

[zooey]

Or you could just not read stuff you're not interested in.

[datacommando]

Nice quote:

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.†- Neil DeGrasse Tyson.

 

Although, while all this discussion is very stimulating, it doesn't seem to have much to with Helix, Line6 and/or Yamaha – which is where it all started.

It seems to have got way off topic, and as I understood it certain issues were supposed NOT to be introduced into discussions on these forums.

 

Can everyone please get back to arguing about the accuracy of the Helix tuner! :)

[cruisinon2]

Or you could just not read stuff you're not interested in.

The "I'm better/smarter/more enlightened" crowd always seems to have trouble doing that. The unrelenting desire for external validation through being thought of as the smartest guy in the room won't allow it. They gotta spread their wisdom "for the greater good".

[HonestOpinion]

The "I'm better/smarter/more enlightened" crowd always seems to have trouble doing that. The unrelenting desire for external validation through being thought of as the smartest guy in the room won't allow it. They gotta spread their wisdom "for the greater good".

 

So true but unfortunately "ignorance" has no issue with spreading the word at the point of a sword for all our mutual benefit either. I always try to avoid politics and religion on a technical forum but it seems the Helix inspires comments about politics, science, and faith, now and then.  Music extends from the political rally to the atheist/agnostic to the house of worship  ;)

 

I just wanted to add that I am frequently impressed with the sheer quantity and quality of heart and brains so many of the people on this forum bring. I daresay if we were all in the same local music scene many of us would be great friends despite our differences of opinion and perspective.

[gkinder]

So true but unfortunately "ignorance" has no issue with spreading the word at the point of a sword for all our mutual benefit either. I always try to avoid politics and religion on a technical forum but it seems the Helix inspires comments about politics, science, and faith, now and then.  Music extends from the political rally to the atheist/agnostic to the house of worship  ;)

 

I just wanted to add that I am frequently impressed with the sheer quantity and quality of heart and brains so many of the people on this forum bring. I daresay if we were all in the same local music scene many of us would be great friends despite our differences of opinion and perspective.

 

Well said....music is expression and does so routinely on all types of subjects....Helix thus becomes a tool of expression  ;)

[brue58ski]

Being a long student and scholar of history and a huge fan of reality: Believing in things has nothing to do with them being grounded in reality and physically real. The religious across the spectrum are the first ones to try and act as if science is a belief or requires you to accept it, it exists in contrast to whatever often delusional aspect of psychology that spins in one's mind. Think what you will, believe what you will, everything in human nature is a matter of your personal genetic markers. Nothing more, nothing less, born a with genius potential or retarded, we all are what we are and whether or not you become obsessed with some psychic communication with your imaginary friend does not give anyone the right to castigate science or non believers  because they are not wired that way. 

There have been infinite religions and 10,000 gods in the human epic, the only thing that is common amount all of them is that their believers were utterly certain they were the one and only truth and light. Those who are convinced any religion or belief construction can "save" the world or admit them to disney land after they die is as mistaken now, as they have been then. The dumbing down of our educational system towards a basis of "faith" and "belief" ideology merely assures when we need science and brilliant persons to save is from a dire crisis, they will be busy praying or lighting candles. 

 

Now let's get back to programming the Helix and playing the music we consider a gift. 

 

That's all fine and the discussion on your points would require a long time.

But it also has nothing to do with what I was referring to which is ACCEPTANCE of other peoples beliefs. I was referring to nothing else. You make a lot of prejudicial statements about the religious and people with beliefs. The truth of other peoples beliefs is a long discussion and the points for and against are always pretty much the same. I include every one of yours. PM me if you want to discuss those. And I sincerely mean discuss. Although it sounds like you're also absolutely "utterly certain" your beliefs are "the one and only truth and light". That's why I'm talking about acceptance and not trying to debate all of our beliefs. And I find it's interesting that you want to "get back to programming the Helix and playing the music we consider a gift." AFTER you've made you're clever statement about your views on religion.

 

OK NOW let's get back to programming the Helix and playing the music we consider a gift. Now that I have the final word. ;)

Just kidding. Do what you will.

[spikey]

The "I'm better/smarter/more enlightened" crowd always seems to have trouble doing that. The unrelenting desire for external validation through being thought of as the smartest guy in the room won't allow it. They gotta spread their wisdom "for the greater good".

I AM TOO!  :P