The Possibility of Human Cognitive Subspecies

2:14:25 PM+NoodlingRazorBack: Well, I completely disagree.  I haven't seen any compelling evidence that leads to a god.  My own conclusion is that god isn't reached by evidence, but rather that the evidence is fitted into a god-containing worldview instead.
2:14:29 PM+SimpleJakXaKep: Okay
2:15:25 PM+SimpleJakThis conversation is almost entirely self-importance
2:15:31 PM+SimpleJakWhy is this conversation almost entirely self-importance?
2:15:45 PM+XaKepyou are an egotist?
2:15:48 PM+SimpleJakA human mind which values knowledge must learn to place their knowledge in the context of the Noosphre
2:15:59 PM+XaKepahh... Teilhard
2:16:06 PM+SimpleJakNoosphere*
2:16:13 PM+XaKephe coined the term
2:16:26 PM+NoodlingRazorBack: Okay, tell me what evidence I haven't examined
2:16:28 PM+XaKepstory book evidence RazorBack ?
2:16:45 PM+SimpleJakWhen science hasn't taken seriously some model for a few decades, and you still think it's open to debate -- without new evidence -- then you are asserting your fumbling about in darkness is superior to collective scientific knowledge
2:16:51 PM+SimpleJakThat is ignorance and self-importance
2:17:00 PM+NoodlingRazorBack: Go on then, what evidence have I not examined?
2:17:03 PM+SimpleJakScience in *every* domain of knowledge hasn't taken theism seriously for about 150 years
2:17:06 PM+SimpleJakAt minimum
2:17:18 PM+SimpleJakYet, here we find ourself in 2018 debating whether or not theism is a good model
2:17:26 PM← Toph1 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2:17:36 PM+SimpleJakXaKep: I didn't know that @ Teilhar
2:17:38 PM+SimpleJakd
2:17:48 PMⓘ QRT set mode +l 58
2:17:52 PM+XaKepde Chardin
2:18:16 PM+NoodlingRazorBack: I've read the bible.  It reads like a book of stories.
2:18:41 PM+XaKepthe story book will defeat all comers ...
2:18:56 PM+XaKepit says so ... "it's recorded"
2:19:19 PM Ignoring Noodling!*@*
2:19:26 PM+SimpleJakNoodling: I put you on ignore for a period
2:19:38 PM+SimpleJakThe way you're engaging RazorBack demonstrates a contempt of knowledge and history
2:19:46 PM+SimpleJakI don't think you actually have a contempt for knowledge and history
2:20:16 PM+SimpleJakBut I think the way you're engaging RazorBack, pretending all conversations and data collected before the present moment, demonstrates that contempt.
2:20:37 PM+SimpleJakRazorBack, with high probability, is not an Enlightenment thinker
2:20:51 PM+SimpleJakYet, you engage them as if they are -- projecting your own epistemology without ever acknowledging that
2:21:05 PM+SimpleJakRazorback, like most Abrahamists are Social Epistemists, that is, the faction leaders determine Truth
2:21:31 PM+SimpleJakIt's an entirely obsolete system for discovering truth, though, unfortunately, our species remains in a battle as to whether methodology or bullies determine Truth
2:21:34 PM+SimpleJakSee Trump and Putin
2:22:15 PM+SimpleJakBeing an Enlightenment thinker means you are required to accept the truth of things you observe that withstand scrutiny -- independent of emotions
2:22:30 PM+SimpleJakThis is one of the ways we differ from Tribe-based epistemology
2:22:35 PM+SimpleJakOne of the things in the universe is RazorBack
2:22:53 PM+SimpleJakYou are required, under Enlightenment thought, to correctly and dispassionately analyze RazorBack just as you would a star or origins of life on Earth
2:23:20 PM+SimpleJakIt is inappropriate to pretend it's something it's not so that you're more emotionally comfortable not appreciating how much the metaphysics and epistemologies of humans really do vary on Earth
2:23:28 PM+XaKepa self fufilling prophecy proves what ?
2:23:38 PM→ Hubmeier has joined
2:23:40 PMⓘ Profound set mode +v Hubmeier
2:23:47 PM+SimpleJakWith some of the resultant problems being intense violence as we're unable to even agree on how to talk to one another
2:23:50 PM+SimpleJakOr whether or not we even exist
2:23:58 PM+SimpleJake.g. Buddhist solipsism
2:24:34 PM+SimpleJakHere's how I resolve the issue: vegetarianism
2:24:41 PM+SimpleJakHow does vegetarianism allow me to resolve this issue?
2:24:59 PM+SimpleJakI think there is one biological human species that features multiple cognitive species, which is an ontological category I made up with some precedent
2:25:13 PM+SimpleJakWhat do I gain with this ontological category?
2:25:32 PM+SimpleJakI am able to do cross-cultural analysis of human conversational and thinking styles that is rooted in computation, e.g. the model of hierarchical complexity
2:26:04 PM+SimpleJakIn this way, I model tribe-based epistemology of Abrahamism to be an inferior approach from a cognitive sub-species of Homo sapiens that need not be further considered after it is analyzed and rejected
2:26:10 PM+SimpleJakIt's not a cultural co-equal
2:26:25 PM+XaKepwill Hubmeier and RazorBack argue about the proper reading of Holy Scripture ?  we can only hope
2:26:29 PM+SimpleJakHowever, I also recognize that tribe-based epistemology makes my analysis of it unreachable to adherents of that system, as I'm not an elder in that tribe
2:26:32 PM+SimpleJakDoes that matter?
2:26:42 PM+SimpleJakNo, it does not, as tribe-based epistemology is a poor approach
2:26:56 PM+SimpleJakIt would be nice if I -- or others -- are able to communicate this to this cognitive sub-species, but it's not necessary
2:27:14 PM+SimpleJakSo, should all the various cognitive sub-species of humans co-exist on Earth?
2:27:17 PM→ Akonyte has joined
2:27:19 PM+SimpleJakSure, just as humans currently do with non-humans
2:27:20 PMⓘ Profound set mode +v Akonyte
2:27:26 PM+XaKepHubmeier, right now , you and RazorBack are the bible authorities here , so it would be interesting to see who prevails
2:27:52 PM+SimpleJakWait, you might ask me: In history, when humans have claimed there are various ontological categories of humans, e.g. race, and that there exists at least a partial sort on those divisions, doesn't intense human suffering result?
2:28:08 PM+SimpleJakTo which I respond, Yes, that is typically what happens, which is why the West is currently built off the false notion of universal equality
2:28:17 PM+SimpleJakIt's not a scientifically accurate idea, but it prevents these kinds of suffering
2:28:41 PM+SimpleJakHow, then, can we have these ontologically real divisions of humans while avoiding the sufferings that have historically come along for the ride?
2:28:45 PM+SimpleJakVegetarianism/veganism
2:29:12 PM+SimpleJakVegetarianism/veganism is a branch of philosophy that works very hard to accurate understand the rights of non-humans, which is a harder problem than the rights of different cognitive subspecies of humans
2:29:28 PM+XaKep"can we agree that the bible is a ratsnest of vague words, that can take you down any rabbithole you choose to pursue?"   LOL  , can't we all just get along ?
2:29:39 PM+SimpleJakAs the gaps between different human groups continues to increase in the 21st century and beyond, we will see that vegetarianism/veganism to one of the most dominant ideologies on Earth
2:30:05 PM* XaKep is vegan already , ahead of the curve
2:30:11 PM+SimpleJakAre there any specific tools from the vegan ideology we can apply to directly here?
2:30:32 PM+SimpleJakYes: The graph-based model of rights by Peter Singer that replaces the threshold person model of common thought
2:30:33 PM+XaKepcatch up dude
2:30:51 PM+SimpleJakWe need not worry whether cognitive subspecies are 'people', as 'person' is undefined in this model
2:31:19 PM+SimpleJakRather, we decide what power/right we're discussing, and then figure out what anatomical/cognitive/emotional/psychological/etc. capacities are required to have that right
2:31:55 PM+SimpleJakAll cognitive subspecies of humans retain most of the rights under the current status quo person threshold model
2:31:57 PM+SimpleJakWhat do they lose?
2:32:10 PM+SimpleJakThey don't have a right to guide civilization, just as tigers don't