Rocky

I watched the limited series. She definitely was playing a seriously HUGE con game on several levels.

Like I mentioned a couple of days ago... I hope you're okay (especially emotionally). You really do seem to be much more obtuse lately.

Rochester Gas & Electric was using this logo more than half a century ago. Ready Kilowatt, they called it. Of course pets provide comfort to people, often in place of human contact. As to looking at Wierwille... I'd rather not.

I hope correcting my typo clarifies the question some.

I suppose they might... for some people. I don't believe that will change human nature, however.

Bolshevik, questions for you: 1) are you suggesting the introduction of AI robots will supplant the human need for interaction with other humans (social needs); 2) are you suggesting these robots with change human nature such that we will no longer need human interaction?

How do you know I haven't already?

How do you know I haven't already?

From page 2 of this thread: Further, the Big Think topic seems to me to be: we know cults exist and are bad, but can the badness be mitigated into something more benign. Further, we also know the importance to humans of BELONGING socially. Can groups which provide a sense of belonging yet do so without most of the adverse characteristics we have come to associate with cults?

No, neither. I stated no such thing. Are you doing the TWIish tactic of answering a question with a question for the purpose of evasiveness rather than clarifying? or... "If human nature changes over time, there's no reason to think AI can't stay ahead of it." That's an interesting thought experiment. Do you know of any AI research suggesting AI would change the social needs of humanity?

"If the purpose of..." Now you're introducing a new premise? If you'd like to, please let us know how you propose to change human nature and social needs.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4947747/ Review of 99 self-report measures for assessing well-being in adults: Exploring dimensions of well-being and developments over time. Linton, M. J., Dieppe, P., & Medina-Lara, A. (2016). BMJ Open, 6(7), e010641.

Whether you want to answer or not, wellbeing IS a defined term. Well-Being Measurement The World Health Organization’s definition of health clearly underscores the importance of well-being: “Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.” Well-being is a broad construct that encompasses multiple dimensions, which can essentially be divided into two large domains: objective and subjective well-being. As a result, various scales and indices have been developed to measure both domains. For a non-exhaustive list of relevant articles on well-being, click here.

How does modern technology, which pushes people away from each other, impact the emotional health of individuals and society? What measures of well-being that can be assessed?

Isn't that an informal form of belonging? We don't necessarily have to have membership in any particular club or church. Currently, I identify as an introvert. I am content with my own company... most of the time. But if I didn't have friends and family who I could love and be loved by, I would not feel like I had anyone with whom "to belong."

Yes, it certainly is.

1) Asking questions is inherently the opposite of providing my own viewpoints. 2) "I assumed it was your journalism stuff" Okay, you acknowledged making assumptions. That may explain why what you wrote makes sense to you and nobody else. 3) You "mentioned major issues of the day?" Again, YOU may know what you mean, but I can't read your mind and haven't guessed (i.e. made assumptions about what you mean). That is WHY I ask questions. 4) When you don't correct your typos (i.e. getted) readers have to guess what you really mean. I'd rather not do that.

It certainly wasn't practiced in TWI when I was involved (more than three and a half decades ago). Yes, it's hard work. M. Scott Peck first introduced it to me when I read his book, The Road Less Traveled. You ask very good questions.

That seems to be the $64,000 question. At this point, all I know is THAT we do inherently need to belong to a social group.

Further, the Big Think topic seems to me to be: we know cults exist and are bad, but can the badness be mitigated into something more benign. Further, we also know the importance to humans of BELONGING socially. Can groups which provide a sense of belonging yet do so without most of the adverse characteristics we have come to associate with cults? We've been interacting on this forum for several years. I don't understand the sudden turn to negativity.

I have no idea (in the context of either this thread or the Big Think video I shared) from what or where or how or why you inferred that "a large portion of the population is considered (in the discussion herein) to be considered "less than human." That's what I mean when I use the words cryptic and obtuse. You seem to be addressing issues/points not introduced into evidence. IF you have QUESTIONS about the subject, ask them, be specific. But making assumptions then asking "please elaborate" don't tell me what you either are talking about or assuming.

Still cryptic/obtuse. Who is talking about culling out individuals or populations or generations of people?

A person either lives with purpose or s/he doesn't. Are you sure you're not overthinking what languish means? Of course, it can take time to determine what one finds purposeful for one's life.

Man's search for meaning. languish verb (used without object) to be or become weak or feeble; droop; fade. to lose vigor and vitality. to undergo neglect or experience prolonged inactivity; suffer hardship and distress:to languish in prison for ten years. to be subjected to delay or disregard; be ignored:a petition that languished on the warden's desk for a year. I hope you're doing well, Bolshevik. It's not like you (usually) to sound so obtuse.