anyone else also hold this view or understand it at least, or do you feel the need to argue that both can in no way coexist?.
Crabby: Well, but here is the thing: The JW population may on average not have advanced education because 1) advanced education is discouraged and 2) if you have advanced education you are more likely to leave.
So here is a brain teaser: If you take those two together, do you think the population of ex-jws necessarily is as uneducated (for lack of a better word) than the jw population?
On this topic, what is your level of education?
anyone else also hold this view or understand it at least, or do you feel the need to argue that both can in no way coexist?.
Crabby: Wait what? you think people on this side are generally uneducated?!
To be honest, the questions you have about the basics of the genetics of the olfactory system kinda indicate you might not be the most diligent and self-critical researcher...
as i said last night the smell of pus from an infection is recognized by all puppies without their being exposed to the smell previously, this is shown because all puppies react the same way to this smell, which is to lick the infected pus laden wound.. this demonstrates that smells are carried on dna in some way.
any thoughts on how?.
Crabby: The genetics of smell is pretty worked out as I wrote on the other thread. We know how the smell receptors arise genetically, and also a bit about how the neural coding of the smells arise in for instance flies. You can read more here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_olfaction
What bit is it precisely you question? (i.e. the genetics of the smell receptors or the neural coding?).
hey everyone!.
first of all, i'm not a jw, in fact i'm an atheist, or if you really want to be technical about it i'm probably something like an agnostic atheist or something.. but, my girlfriend is a jw, she seems very rational about it though, it seems to me that she believes in a lot of it but not exactly all, for instance she does understands and believes in the scientific age of the earth and evolution.. when we started dating almost a year ago she made it clear she as religious person.
i never saw that as a problem, it's not like i'm trying to convert her or she's trying to convert me.
GG:
She's pulled in two directions and hasn't exactly gravitated towards your side. She's putting herself and the fear for her mother before you. None of these factors are a good bedrock for a budding relationship.
I agree there are serious communication problems, but looking at it from GF's perspective she is likely in the emotional turmoil of her life so I wouldn't judge her to hard on moving back with her parents.. I was nearly in the OPs shoes some years back and I am happy that I stuck it out despite all the WTBS bullshit. If she is special, staying with her and helping her waking up is not the most silly thing a guy has done over a girl :-).
hey everyone!.
first of all, i'm not a jw, in fact i'm an atheist, or if you really want to be technical about it i'm probably something like an agnostic atheist or something.. but, my girlfriend is a jw, she seems very rational about it though, it seems to me that she believes in a lot of it but not exactly all, for instance she does understands and believes in the scientific age of the earth and evolution.. when we started dating almost a year ago she made it clear she as religious person.
i never saw that as a problem, it's not like i'm trying to convert her or she's trying to convert me.
concernCitizen:
Disfellowshipping (DF) and Disassociation (DA) are similar in terms of the consequences (she will be cut of by anyone she knows and considered death until she is reinstated, a long process). They differ in that you get disfellowshipped if 1) she is baptized and 2) you are found guilty of a serious sin by a judicial committee (a tribunal of 3 elders), for instance if they learn that you have had sex or just slept under the same roof.
Speaking of which, is she baptized? (this is very important)
DAing is most commonly something she does by writing a letter and asking for it. Otherwise she can be "forcefully" DAd if it for instance is found out she is a member of another religion. Insofar as you are concerned, DF/DA are the same.
The elders have a manual that lay out all these procedures in detail which is secret. She can't know that you are reading it but you can find it online (google: shepherd the flock of God).
If she is baptized, the best thing that can happen from your perspective is that she fade out. You fade out by slowly stopping to go to the meetings, don't do anything "wrong" (like living with you before you are married) and possibly feigning a depression. After a few years they will begin to leave you alone as long as you don't rock the boat. Then she will be said to be "inactive" and you two will get more breathing space. The bad news is that she will likely loose all her friends who are JW and be viewed by her family as someone who couldn't hack the spiritual life and she will constantly reminded (because the JWs are constantly reminded to do so!) that she should "return to Jehovah".
If she is not baptized you two are lucky :-). She can't be DFd or DA. If she choose to be with you it will still disappoint her family a lot (you can expect that you will be a disappointment to her family), but it likely won't have so severe consequences. You can still expect her friends not to stick around since she is obviously not "good association", and my guess would be that if it is found out she is sleeping/living with you it will strain her relationship with her parents a lot.
hey everyone!.
first of all, i'm not a jw, in fact i'm an atheist, or if you really want to be technical about it i'm probably something like an agnostic atheist or something.. but, my girlfriend is a jw, she seems very rational about it though, it seems to me that she believes in a lot of it but not exactly all, for instance she does understands and believes in the scientific age of the earth and evolution.. when we started dating almost a year ago she made it clear she as religious person.
i never saw that as a problem, it's not like i'm trying to convert her or she's trying to convert me.
I feel like I'm ready to try my best to clear her mind but I don't even know where to start, I already know about jwfacts and it was even that website that got me here. But just exposing her to their practices problems doesn't seem to be enough.
thx for the responses. If anyone else has more to share please do, I'm even considering showing her this thread.
Don't show her jwfacts if she is the least in, it is very unlikely to change her minds (the author of JWfacts is a mentally diseased apostate according to the standard JW view). As a rule, "facts" about her religion is very unlikely to do anything good no matter how obvious they seem to you. And for the love of jehovah don't show her this thread!
What I think you need to do is to first and foremost work on better communication with her. If she is not comfortable talking about her religion when it comes to objective and non-threatening things (like disfellowshipping), you have very little chance for a good conversation on difficult topics. This is basically step 1 of the book I mentioned :-).
hey everyone!.
first of all, i'm not a jw, in fact i'm an atheist, or if you really want to be technical about it i'm probably something like an agnostic atheist or something.. but, my girlfriend is a jw, she seems very rational about it though, it seems to me that she believes in a lot of it but not exactly all, for instance she does understands and believes in the scientific age of the earth and evolution.. when we started dating almost a year ago she made it clear she as religious person.
i never saw that as a problem, it's not like i'm trying to convert her or she's trying to convert me.
Hi,
I am in (roughly) the same situation as you are (atheist dating a JW).
Your girlfriend is a very special kind of JW if she believes in evolution and are at all interested in a non-jw let alone an atheist; this suggests she is not fully "in" her religion but has doubts and may leave (or fade out) of the religion in the future. I wouldn't just advice you to leave her (that's certainly not what I did!) but there are some things I would worry about if I were you: (I assume your girlfriend is baptized; that's a very important piece of information so you should ask her about that)
* Why is she not telling you the truth about her religion? She might be embarrassed or whatever, but it seems to me to be a pretty big thing to not mention. Are you sure she actually believe in evolution? (JWs accept something akin to "change within a kind" and that the earth is 4 billion years old; they just reject common descend and believe man has only been here for about 6000 years).
* If you two stay together it *will* hurt your girlfriend one way or another:
- If she stays in, you are in for some difficult times later on. She will in various ways be made aware she choose the wrong partner, and if your girlfriends family are hardcore you can expect them to put you on the shit list at least until you are married and possibly later. She will be expected to bring up her children "in the truth" (i.e. indoctrinated), not to celebrate birthdays. This will lead to conflicts later on.
- If she leaves (not disassociation but rather just stop goes to meetings), she will be viewed as a bad apple by her family. If her family are "good jws", you should not expect that her family wants anything to do with you until you are married, in fact you should not expect them to show up to your marriage. If she does anything "wrong" (like you two living together), she will be disfellowshipped and not see her family again. Most likely, even if you are married you will still have to hide things from her family because she will still be expected not to celebrate birthdays.
Basically, if you stay together, you guys are in for a giant multi-year shit show no matter what!
If you decide to stay together, I think there are a few things you should do:
1) Don't go Richard Dawkins on her, an in particular don't criticize her religion in such a way she can tell you have searched out ex-jw literature. If she says something you disagree with, try to limit your comments to "common sense" objections ("well, I couldn't imagine shunning my child no matter what"), be humorous and be non-assertive.
2) Work on your communication. Where does she stand in relationship to you? How can you make her comfortable talking about her religion? (ask her). Don't read to much into her living with her mum as she is in a very tough spot.
3) Be aware that if she is baptized (and probably also if not), if she does something "bad" you can expect everyone she knows to rat on her, including herself. In particular, *noone can know* you have had sex or lived together.
4) Educate yourself about cults. Standard atheist literature is completely useless. The best reference is probably Steven Hassan's books, in particular "Combating cult mind-control" (or one of the never). Order it on amazon today.
anyone else also hold this view or understand it at least, or do you feel the need to argue that both can in no way coexist?.
Crabby:
DNA is NOT information theory, nor is the information that it carries a theory
I think you misunderstand me.
"Information theory" is the (mathematical) discipline which studies terms like "information", "code", etc. Thus, when we choose to have an argument over whether DNA contains information, or what that implies, we can either do it in light of information theory or with our own intuitions about what information ought to be or do. Similarly, if we argued over what a black hole is, we could either do it in the light of cosmology and general relativity, or with out own intuitions about what a black hole ought to be or do.
What I point out is that if we consider information as defined in information theory it is *very* difficult to see how it offers an argument against evolution.
because all puppies react the same way to the pus of infection which has a pungent smell. Nothing known about DNA can account for this.
I beg to differ. When we smell an object, we do so because we have special smell receptors (special molecules) that binds to the particular molecules that that object releases. These molecules in our nose are made by snippets of DNA. So to account for why puppies react like they do, all we need to do is to show that the dog genomen contains DNA that code for smell receptors that bind to molecules that are particular to pus, and that they are wired up to create a reaction in dogs, just like we are wired to have a negative reaction to "bad" smells associated with death and decay.
anyone else also hold this view or understand it at least, or do you feel the need to argue that both can in no way coexist?.
Seriously it carries genetic information. If not you could not be where you are and aware. Anyone who could conclude that DNA does not carry information is mentally ill.
When we use terms like "Information" in information theory it is as parts of our way of describing a physical system where that description is apt. For instance, when we encounter a rare occurrence (a rare word, DNA sequence or other event) we say that carry more information than a common word, sequence or event. But on this view, which I stress is the standard view (google Shannon information), we could just as easily say that the weather carries information (i.e. if it rains or the sun shines) and that there is more "information" in rainy weather than sunny weather -- however noone would seriously use these definitions to argue that the weather was not purely guided by physical laws. It is just our description!
Now, you might rightly point out the weather lacks something the DNA has, namely a code. This is true! however the same comments apply to the code: That it is just our description, i.e. a special set of words we choose to use, for a sequence of events that are governed by the laws of chemistry.
So yes the DNA can be said to contain information. But where do we go from here?
i have just enabled a new sort feature which should appear as a new tab called "rank" on any of the topic listing pages (by forum or subject within it).. there's also a "hottest" link in the main nav.. what does it do?.
well, think of it like active topics ... the latest things go to the top.
except instead of anyone being able to make something go straight to the top simply by posting on it, now the ranking is based on a combination of things including how many likes and dislikes they have received combined with when the posts were made.. what should happen is that likes for new posts will give them a boost as will replies but over time their effect will diminish.
from the department of really minor quibbles: I would suggest changing the order of the "Hottest" and "Latest" button because most forums sort by "Latest" and so it should be the default and have the most prominent place.
