FEEDSEDIT

Top Stories
Funerals
Hindu Gods
Temples
Ladakh, Jammu and Kashmir, India
Human Exploration of Mars

TRENDING NOW

Processed Meats Linked to Cancer

The Walking Dead Season 6 Episode 3
Theranos Problems

Top Stories For You

From Your Quora Digest
Death and Dying

Did Sauron actually die after the ring was destroyed?

Helge Kre Fauskanger, sometimes Tolkienist, semi-fluent in Elvish

32k Views
Helge is a Most Viewed Writer in The Lord of the Rings (creative franchise).

There are many insightful answers here, but nobody seems to have mentioned the most
relevant quote. Here is what Gandalf, during the Last Debate, predicted might happen to
Sauron:
"Concerning thi... (more)
Upvote77 Downvote
Comments3+
Share
From Your Quora Digest
Loss, Grief, Bereaveme...

Newtown School Shooting (Dec 2012): Why was Robbie Parker smiling
before an interview about the killing of his daughter?

Gayle Laakmann McDowell, Author: Cracking the Coding Interview, Cracking the PM
Interview, Cracking th...

22.4k Views

Because he's normal.

There was a study done on people's reaction to their child's death. They asked a bunch of
people how they would feel one year after their child's death. Invariably, people say... (more)
Upvote192 Downvote
Comments6+
Share1
From Your Quora Digest
Outer Space

Why can't we just install a network of underground bases on Mars?

Robert Frost, Instructor and Flight Controller at NASA

44.4k Views
Robert is a Most Viewed Writer in Space Exploration with 126 endorsements.

Why can't you play Rachmaninoff's Piano Concerto #3 on a Casio keyboard while driving a
Maybach Exelero on the Autobahn?
It's &$%^*ing hard and $%^$%*ing expensive.
Building an underground base, ... (more)
Upvote2.6k Downvote
Comments59+
Share24

From Your Quora Digest

What are some of the most touching photos ever taken?

Raza Majeed, Amateur Photographer

18.3k Views

A female humpback whale had become entangled in a spider web of crab traps and lines.
She was weighted down by hundreds of pounds of traps that caused her to struggle to stay
afloat. She also had h... (more)
Upvote763 Downvote
Comments5+
Share3
From Your Quora Digest

What are 10 or fewer good habits for a 24 year old that can make life
better?

Imran Esmail, Productivity Coach on Coach.me.

231.2k Views
Imran is a Most Viewed Writer in Teenagers and Teenage Years.
Originally Answered: What are the top 10 good habits that I should follow daily to have a beautiful life?

Unlike everybody else (sorry guys), I am going to ignore your question and share only one.
The ONE habit to change your life.
Because the truth of the matter is...99.9% of people struggle to even... (more)
Upvote3.4k Downvote
Comments33+
Share6
From Your Quora Digest

When parents announce which name they chose for their newborn
baby, is it rude to tell them you don't like the name?

Vanessa McCabe, Mother of 3 children under the age of 4.

13.8k Views Upvoted by Bart Loews, Father of 3

Let me tell you a story. When my husband and I first got married we were going to get a dog.
He was a Greater Swiss Mountain Dog which ended up weighing 140lbs. Because we knew
that he would be a b... (more)
Upvote75 Downvote
Comments1+
Share
From Your Quora Digest
NASA

Did NASA have rescue plan for Apollo 11 if they failed to leave the
Moon?

C Stuart Hardwick, Writers of the Future award winner. www.cStuartHardwick.com

6.6k Views
C Stuart is a Most Viewed Writer in The Moon with 100+ answers.

They had a plan, just not a rescue plan.

Since rescue was impossible with the technology available at the time, President Nixon's
speech writer, William Safire, prepared this text, which the pres... (more)
Upvote97 Downvote
Comments4+
Share
From Your Quora Digest

If I hacked into the NSA and Pentagon and dumped all their files, (1)
how big would the manhunt for me be; (2) would it finally open the eyes
of the public, and; (3) how would I be seen by the hacker circle?

Carter Moore, Thinks About These Sorts of Things Too Often

260.7k Views Upvoted by Bart Loews, worked at The Pentagon for 3 years
Carter is a Most Viewed Writer in Hypothetical Scenarios.

All their files? Like, *all* their files? Like the current locations, names, and personal
information of clandestine personnel? All the information we have on active terrorists, their
financiers an... (more)
Upvote1.1k Downvote
Comments16+
Share13
From Your Quora Digest
Consciousness

Will human consciousness ever be transferable?

Bradley Voytek, Ph.D. neuroscience, UCSD Asst. Professor Cognitive Science

14.8k Views Upvoted by Andrea Zvinakis, I'm getting a degree in symbolic systems. Manjari
Narayan, Neurostatistician, published in J. Neurosci Research Public John Shen, Ph.D. student in
Neuroscience
Bradley is a Most Viewed Writer in Neuroscience.

User is referring to the Blue Brain Project. Henry Markram gave a TED talk about this:
http://www.ted.com/talks/henry_m...
It is very important to not conflate simulating <human number> of interconnected neurons
in a computer with transferring a biological brain to a digital format.

We are still learning fundamental details about neuroanatomy and neuronal

communication. For example, about 15 years ago it was found that nitric oxide (NO) works
as a neurotransmitter. NO diffuses across, through, and past local synapses and can have
long distance effects. This is very hard to model.
Even more recently, it was found that up to 5% of glial cells--traditionally thought of as noninformation carrying/transmitting structural cells--actually communicate via action
potentials. There are about 10-20 times more glial cells in the brain than there are neurons.
If this 5% number turns out to be true, the math says that there might be twice as many
information conveying cells in the brain as was previously thought.
That's a huge error!
So sure, we can simulate a simple neuron connected to thousands or millions of other
neurons via synapses in a pseudo-biologically plausible manner, but I believe it's naive to
think that is the brain.
I think the neurosciences right now are where physics was in the early 1900s. A bunch of
people thought Newtonian mechanics could explain everything. Turns out, the physical
universe is much more complicated than that. Now we have quantum mechanics, relativity,
the multiverse, dark energy, etc.
Neuroscience knows a lot about the biology and structure of the neuron, but not about how
the brain works.
EDIT
Now that I've thought about this more, I'm even more confused by the idea that simulating a
bunch of neuron-like elements digitally is anything like the brain. That's like making the
argument that soldering together a couple of million transistors in a "computer-like" fashion
would give you a working MacbookPro.
Updated 7 Jul 2010 View Upvotes
Upvote168 Downvote
Comments5+
Share1
From Your Quora Digest

At what age should a child start to proactively take initiative to learn to

improve on their own without being nagged by a parent?

Michelle Roses, My two daughters are going to be trouble...

47.1k Views Upvoted by Anita Sanz, psychologist
Michelle is a Most Viewed Writer in Children.

As someone who was a professional dancer and dance teacher for 30 years, your wife is
behaving terribly.
First of all, your daughter can not possibly perfect any of the positions and movements
of ... (more)
Upvote447 Downvote
Comments7+
Share
Answer written
Spirituality
11h

What are the limits of meditation?

Stan Belot, somewhere along the Path

17 Views
Stan is a Most Viewed Writer in Meditation with 290+ answers.

Taken from What are the negative aspects of meditation?

Depression-like symptoms, emotional breakdown and emotional indifference
can happen -- and other minor adverse effects -First, let's get the obvious out of the way.
There are many different meditation techniques (see Giovanni Dienstmann's very
useful overview of 23 Types of Meditation) -- and each person practices a bit
differently. You may almost-always find a counter-example to any general
statement about meditation

Some practices will be more intense than others. For example, the now-popular
mindfulness movement seems like a gentle secular self-psychotherapy and
introspection. A Three-Month Retreat at IMS is an entirely different beast.

Some people think they meditate when in fact they day-dream for some time
while sitting on a cushion. That's perfectly fine if they like it, but that's not
meditation. Escaping from reality offers nice temporary relief or joy -- not longterm happiness.

Just about all Buddhist traditions have developed "maps" -- sometimes called progress of
insight (*) -- describing the typical state of mind of meditators as they develop their
experience.
The maps I am familiar with include stages called Fear, Disgust, Misery, Desire for
Deliverance, for example.
You immediately take it from there that rough psychological is just about expected at some
point in the practice.

I'd have a hard time explaining in details the reasons behind that on Quora. First, I'm not
that familiar with this terrain, and second, it would take a long post using odd-sounding
vocabulary.
Rather, I'll use a rough proxy.
Experienced meditators will have spend quite a lot of time looking honestly at their own
sensations and thoughts -- including the kind of thoughts that we generally do not want to
face directly: old memories, regrets, and some extreme fantasies that could come up (**).
Physical pain also can come during long meditation sits.
Over time, meditators realize that a lot of what they used to take from granted is actually
wrong. They have and experience, naturally in themselves, more extreme emotions and
thoughts than they expected to find. Their sense of Self (as in "I am the kind of person
who...") can get a real shake.
You fear what you find -- and what might come next. You feel miserable because you overidentify with all that "stuff" that comes during meditation sessions.
The one way out is to include those (strong, negative) emotions and feelings in the practice
-- and face them for what they are: simply another set of thoughts and emotions that have
no reality apart from being a thought or an emotion. They arise and pass away in a few
second, just like any other sensation. They exist in our heads and are not the solid reality.
Easy enough, but requiring dedication, focus and an ability not to get caught into the
thoughts and emotions.
This leads to another major risk: mistaking equanimity with indifference.
When trying to face reality as it is -- its positive and negative aspects -- meditators try to
develop Equanimity: the mind-set of accepting things as they are without getting
disturbed / overwhelmed by the associated emotional reaction.
Note the important point: not getting disturbed or overwhelmed.
Some people mistake this for not feeling the emotional reaction at all. This wrong
understanding can create indifference, apathy and unhealthy detachment.
Compare and contrast:
Overwhelmed: What did you do!? Good gods ! You are the stupidest #%*$
ever and that's the same as last time and you...

Equanimity: What you did makes me very angry. Really. I want you to know
that.
I want an apology and that you start ...

Indifferent: Oh? You killed my dog? Yeah, whatever....

So both natural progress and / or a misunderstanding of the practice can lead to depressionlike symptoms:

Negative feelings towards oneself

Detachment or creating distance with others

Indifference, apathy, and lack of engagement with other activities / with others

The typical ways to address those issues are:

Get comfort that this is perfectly normal and that there is a natural way out

Ensure proper physical fitness (enough sleep, some sports, if possible outdoors)
and social interactions (keep friendships active, do not go to long solitary
retreats, etc.)

Re-frame the issues: what happens during a formal meditation session should
not affect daily life. Indeed, a thought is just a thought and a feeling is just a
feeling. 'Easier said than done.)

Re-set the attention all sensations: Enjoy the good! Deal with the bad! Do not
over-focus on one or the other.

It is interesting to see that countries with long Buddhist traditions (Tibet, Burma) know how
to deal with those things very naturally -- because the whole context expects it can happen.
In the West, we have a rather limited approach to meditation -- many practitioners do not
know the underlying theory well and too-many teacher avoid the subject for fear of losing
the interest of people. This makes us rather un-prepared to help those who struggle with
the above.
Dr. Willoughby Britton, of Brown University founded the The Clinical and Affective
Neuroscience Laboratory to investigate scientifically all the above. (She is mentioned in The
Atlantic Magazine article - The Dark Knight of the Soul that George Sawyer advised you to
read -- I second this recommendation).
I strongly recommend you check some of their findings in the Media / Video section, in
particular: Adverse Effects

(*) See The Progress of Insight by Mahasi Sayadaw as a prime example in the Theravada
tradition . Warning: the style and heavy use of specific vocabulary make it very confusing
for a beginner.
(**) Random example: you do not really want to kill you @-hole of a boss. But you could
have a few strong images coming up about it. You realize you have a small, latent potential
for violence in you.
Written 11h ago View Upvotes
Upvote1 Downvote
Comment

Share
Question asked
Botany
Thu

What is the name of the this plant with thick stems and jagged leaves?

(more)
1 Answer
Write Answer
Pass

Follow6
Downvote
Answer written
Indian Ethnicity and People
15 Oct

Is India the safest and best place for Muslims? Can Hindus be
considered as most tolerant people towards other religious beliefs?

Sarath Nair, Indian By Choice

27.2k Views Upvoted by Kushal Kulshreshtha, Hindustani, Bhartiya and Indian

I will tell you 2 short stories which will answer your question.
In Pakistan, there was a great great man. His name was Dr. Abdus Salam. Pioneer of
theoretical physics. Nobel Prize Winner in 1979. Contributor to various science
programs in Pakistan. His only problem, he was an Ahmadi Muslim. Ahmadis consider their
founder, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (18351908), as the Messiah and Mahdi ("Guided One")
promised by Islamic tradition, whereas Sunnis and Shias insist that Muhammed was the
last and definitive prophet.
In 1984, Zia Ul Haq's government adopted Ordinance XX, legally barring Ahmadis from
"posing as Muslims" and thereby declaring them 'Heretics'. This went to such an extent
that an order was given to remove the word "Muslim" from his grave which said
"First Muslim Nobel Laureate for his work in Physics". He therefore had to spend
his last years in Europe and die in Europe even though being a proud Pakistani. Saddest
part is that some Pakistani's I have as friends here in Munich don't even know him. Why?
Just because he had a different faith than the majority.
In India, there was also a great man called Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam. He was India's Missile
Man. He was the greatest inspiration to all people of science including me. He was
responsible for instigating the culture of science among common men like you and me. He
was also elected as President Of India, the highest constitutional post in India. There are
numerous roads, institutes named after the great man. When he died the entire nation
mourned. He was a Muslim.
Like him there are so many people loved in India who are Muslims. The Khans of
Bollywood, AR Rahman, Ustad Bismillah Khan, Zakir Hussain and the list is
endless. One of our most successful and longest serving captains of the game we love like
fanatics was a Muslim in Mohammed Azharuddin. Being Muslims does not deter the
Indians from loving people who having contributed to the development of India. This is a
sign of a tolerant nation. Hindus being a majority, you can extend this to conclude majority
of Hindus are tolerant.
So, if the condition of a great man who was a minority in Islam is like that of Dr.Abdus

Salam, then you can infer what will be the condition of other minorities like Hindus and
Christians. During partition there were 17% Hindus in Pakistan which is now 2%.
In India its the reverse with Muslim population increasing every census
I am not saying all Hindus are tolerant. There are some who think exactly like the
Islamists. But that population is approximately same as that of tolerant Muslims in
Pakistan. Most importantly the governing system in India is not setup keeping religion in
mind which allows everyone equal opportunity.
Yes there are communal riots in India and everything is not hunky-dory, but if you take a
consensus of all Muslims in India, I can bet my life on the fact that the majority of Muslims
would want to stay in India and not move to Pakistan. Hinduism does not say it is the one
true religion and does not enforce religion on its followers, hence Hindus turn out to be
more liberal and tolerant (Again generalizing. Not saying all Hindus are this way. but the
majority is).
So yes to answer your question, India is the safest place for Muslims and Hindus are the
most tolerant people. If this was not the case, Muslims in India would face the same fate as
the Hindus in Pakistan. Go down from 17% to 2%, either by forcible conversions or by
killing.
Updated 16 Oct View Upvotes
Upvote898 Downvote
Comments11+
Share3
Answer written
Philosophy of Everyday Life
Sat

My son told me today that he is gay. I kicked him out of my house. Now
I don't know where he is, and I'm worried about him. Was I wrong?

Jennifer Ellis, I believe we should be treated equally under the law

47.8k Views Upvoted by Mei Douthitt, LGBTQ Advocate and Member
Jennifer is a Most Viewed Writer in LGBTQI.

Yes, you were wrong. You kicked your child out of the house due to your bigotry and
intolerance. Now you are reaping the rewards that come with that. You are worried because
you don't know where he... (more)
Upvote1.8k Downvote
Comments35+
Share
Answer written
Spirituality

 3h

Why does Eckhart Tolle charge for his teachings?

Margaret Weiss, a spiritual being

5 Views

He can and he wants to - and that's the answer.

Going by the rules of mysticism, it is more appropriate to ask someone for payment based
on what they believe to be the proper amount, thus letting t... (more)
Upvote1 Downvote
Comment
Share
Question asked
Vedic Astrology
15 Oct

Vedic Astrology: What's the difference between northern-style, easternstyle, and southern-style charts in Vedic astrology?
1 Answer
Write Answer
Pass
Follow2
Downvote
Answer written
Death and Dying
12 Oct

My wife today was diagnosed with stage 4 cancer. Shes currently in

good health, absolutely thinking clearly. Weve 2 young kids, aged 5
and 7. What is some (non-medical) advice? ****Edit - my wife passed
away in Aug 2015****

Stephanie Vardavas, lost both parents within a 14-month period

12.5k Views
Stephanie is a Most Viewed Writer in Death and Dying.

I'm chiming in late here just to say that I am very sorry to learn of your loss, and that I'm
honored to be a part of the Quora community that came together to try to help you (even
though I didn't... (more)
Upvote48 Downvote
Comment1
Share
Answer written
Spirituality
Sat

What is really achieved when you reach a higher level of consciousness

through either Meditation, Knowledge, possibly Drugs (Psychedelics)
etc...?

Mounir Baroudi, Ignosticist

257 Views

On Quora, there seems to be a lot of people eager to give spiritual counsel. I feel that this is
because the culture and etiquette of Quora breeds self-aggrandizing and self-righteous
behavior.
Nonetheless, I will answer this question without a condescending tone of spiritual elitism
and with acknowledgement of current scientific literature on the subject.
Overall, I think that enlightenment aka "reaching higher levels of consciousness" is a
neurocognitive change, that is it is a neurophysiology change with subsequent cognitive
changes. While some of these changes are likened to morally-glorified characteristics such
as compassion, and humility, the greatest changes acknowledged by science on meditation
is the following

Neurologically - Thicker and denser neocortexes and corpus collasums have been
observed in long-time meditators. The neocortex is the outermost layer of the
brain and the phylogenically newest part of the nervous system. The corpus
collasum is a lot of long connecting axons running between each brain
hemisphere. It can be thought of as the information "super-highway" between the
left and right brain. Also, a Harvard study showed that after 6 months of
practicing meditation, subjects' brain region responsible for stress significantly
decreased.

Cognitively - Better focus ability is the most reported cognitive change of

consistent meditation.

While science has investigated meditation thoroughly, there has not been any real scientific
exploration of "enlightenment". Also, there is the problem of correlating meditation to
enlightenment because the two are not necessarily the same thing. Presumably, one can

reach enlightenment without meditation and one can meditate without ever reaching
enlightenment.
That said, I think that the enlightenment as a neurocognitive change has been drowned and
distorted by moral perversion and spiritual mysticism be self-proclaimed "gurus". Too often,
I feel, too much emphasis is placed on how much of a "bettter" person enlightenment will
make you, instead fo emphasis on how much "better" you brain/mind will function once
enlightened, because after all, that is all there is to you anyway.
Examples of such distortions are the notions that there is no "self", which is a semantic
absurdity. Descartes would agree with me. Another example is the notion that there is no
physical reality. The entire field of physics would agree with me. Another is that
enlightenment is not "an achievement". This is the one that I feel hinders the scientific
examination of enlightenment more than anything.
I feel this way because the only way science can extract the essence of the neurocognitive
change of enlightenment from the hedonistic-perversionand the moral-dogma that
distort its character, is the acknowledge the change for what it is: a real change. In this case,
labeling this change an achievement is entirely appropriate. Perhaps those who try be
spiritual teachers and spiritual counsel try to stray away from such notions for the sake of
teaching, but for the sake of science, it must be acknowledge. There are other such "taboos"
in modern spiritual circles. For example, it is considered "taboo" to speak about your
progress in spiritual circles, but I feel that this only hinders the learning environment and
tries to leave enlightenment shrouded in mystical mystery.
That said, I think that the 4 stages in the "Path to Holiness" in Mahayana Buddhism are a
good place to start as far as detailing the graded progression of enlightenment. The levels
are:
1. Cravaka - stage said on include the aforementioned stages as it's sub-stages:
stream enterer, once returner, non-returner, aranhat
2. Pratyeka Buddha
3. Bodhisattava
4. Buddha

Here is a screenshot of the book in Google Books where I got this from.
Now, personally what I feel is achieved when one reaches enlightenment is:
An understand of what one is not. This is not the same as saying that there is no self, but it
means that what one previously considered self, or at least a version of self is not longer a
self. I think this progresses in various stages
1. You are not primarily your self-referential stream of thoughts. This stream in
particular that I am referring to is the ego's crosstalk.
2. You are not at all your self-referential stream of thoughts.
3. You are not primarily your egoic self-image. That is, you are not what you
perceive yourself to look like, sound like, smell like etc.
4. You are not at all your egoic self-image.
5. You are not your history.
6. You are not your knowledge. For example, you are not your understand of
chemistry or your understanding of politics.
7. You are not your thoughts. That is you, are not what you think about yourself.
Written Sat View Upvotes
Upvote3 Downvote
Comments1+
Share
Answer written
Enlightenment (spiritual)
13 Oct

If I've experienced events that compel me to conclude the existence of

an entity lacking personification (i.e. God) but still fits a definition as the
source of all that is, can I logically refute atheism on this alone?

Barry Hampe, . Lifetime atheist from a Christian family.

2.2k Views Barry has 54 endorsements in Atheism.
Barry is a Most Viewed Writer in Enlightenment (spiritual).

As an atheist, I have never denied that personal experience can be powerfully convincing to
believers. They are convinced they have experienced the presence of a god. Therefore your
experience sho... (more)
Upvote61 Downvote
Comments5+
Share

Discover new people

Alec Cawley
Physics degree followed by forty years of embedded software
Answers about Religion and6 more
Follow1.5k

Anwesha Jana
Answers about Human Behavior and 2 more
Follow1.8k

Rick Thorne
Give me flawed man-made knowledge over flawed man-made ignorance anytime.
Answers about Philosophyand 3 more
Follow429
Question followed
Tsunamis

 19 Oct

At what rate does the force of a Tsunami wave degrade as it crosses the
open ocean?
Write Answer
Pass
Follow4
Downvote
Answer written
Meditation
16 Oct

Can you explain what is happening to me during my Third eye

meditation (432Hz)?

Pete Ashly, keeps coming back

72 Views
Pete is a Most Viewed Writer in Meditation.

I am of the school of meditation that says "don't get involved", the intent of meditation to
get out of mind, not indulge it and drive up levels of crazy.
You might try this style zazen out before you continue down a path with unknown
consequences. You might open doors you can't close.
Zazen training video by Pete Ashly on Petes Bookmarks
Written 16 Oct View Upvotes Asked to answer by Nadia Naanaa
Upvote1 Downvote
Comment
Share
Answer written
Religion
11 Oct

Could an atheist be a valid witness in a court trial?

Joe Devney, Forensic linguist

5k Views Upvoted by Barry Hampe, . Lifetime atheist from a Christian family.

I have been sworn in a couple of times. Nobody gave me a Bible, and I was not told to say
"so help me God." I simply raised my hand and promised to tell the truth. My religion or
lack of it was irr... (more)
Upvote183 Downvote
Comments2+
Share
Answer written
Cosmology
11 Oct

I have made a new theory regarding special relativity, cosmology and

quantum mechanics. I am still 14 so I do not know how to write it in a
mathematical way but I have all the proofs in visual manner which show
how energy, mass and time were formed. How do I publish without
sufficient support?

Carl-Fredrik Brodda, physics student.

83k Views
Carl-Fredrik is a Most Viewed Writer in Proofs (mathematics).

First of all - take none of this personally. I think you've done a great job, and you'll see why
at the end.
I'm sorry to say this, but you don't have anything close to a theory. You have a
hypot... (more)
Upvote359 Downvote
Comments8+
Share3
Question followed
Trees (plants)
Sun

Plants: Which type of tree has the longest root system?

3 Answers
Write Answer
Pass
Follow8
Downvote
Answer written

Spirituality
15 Oct

If I believe in karma, and karma is real, then shouldn't I just give out
everything for free and know that I will get it all back anyway?

Aurora Clawson Request Bio

273 Views
Aurora is a Most Viewed Writer in Spirituality.

Karma is an energetic universal principle that is an aspect of something called the Law of
Attraction. This law is in place because as sentient beings, our minds, our thoughts, our
emotions and beliefs have the power to affect all of life. We therefore have the responsibility
to life and ourselves, to learn how to think in alignment with the truth of balance and
harmony in this creation, so we will grow out of being a destructive force, and learn to feel
our unity with all of life.
All of the creation is energy and principles. There has to be a cohesive system of ordering
within each aspect in order to facilitate the creative potential and sustenance of the universe
as a synergistic, intelligent power. There is ordering in a tiny seed and ordering in a galaxy.
There are systems in place that support all potentiality of form and how that form interacts
with all other form.
If you have not taken any time to truly understand this law of karma in any depth, you will
tinker with fun little concepts about it. All the while, that law has created the life
experiences that make up your reality. It is our responsibility as sentient human beings to
awaken to the deeper truths about life. This must be a choice however, as we are given self
authority and self dignity. We can choose to remain blissfully ignorant and in pain for as
long as we want.
Karma works upon INTENTION, not action. It is what you intend from that action that
manifests the nature of what you receive from that action.
If you give something away only to receive, your intention is to get and not truly to
give. True giving, and the truest intention of giving is not to receive anything back at all,
because someone who can do that has already undergone a process of self development in
which they recognize an inner effulgence and joy that doesn't change no matter what
happens in the world. As well, you may accidentally hurt someone while seeking to help
them. The action of you hurting them would not be what karma would respond to, but your
intention to help them. Therefore, you may give something to someone and the action many
look as if it represents a positive intention. However, if you are giving something in order to
manipulate them, or get something back in return, your intention is not pure, but based
upon wanting to get something back. So actions, the outer appearance can be deceiving.
Since the universe knows your mind on all levels, the intention of your action is crystal clear
to universal mind. You can fool a fool. You cannot fool universal genius.
This will not get you any of your things back. Its not about getting things in the world, but

developing wisdom that is real....Suffice it to say you have the choice as to whether or not to
embrace the law of karma. Just know that karma does not require your belief to have
existed for centuries and to continue to navigate your life in tandem with your thoughts and
intentions.
Written 15 Oct View Upvotes
Upvote7 Downvote
Comments2+
Share
Answer written
Human Behavior
14 Oct

Why do people get married?

Aditya Jais, Had been into 3 reallyyyyy long relationships

309.2k Views Upvoted by Gwen Sawchuk, I've loved and lost a few times, but have been found when i
Aditya is a Most Viewed Writer in Dating and Relationships.

I have a friend in office, a very philosophical guy, he never married.

He is still single. Though he fell in love once, he couldnt commit to the girl. She finally left
him.
He once said , Aditya... (more)
Upvote16.1k Downvote
Comments122+
Share201
Answer written
Human Evolution
20 Jul

According to the theory of evolution, why do we die?

Suzanne Sadedin, Ph.D. in evolutionary biology from Monash University

119.1k Views Upvoted by Adriana Heguy, molecular biologist, genomics researcher Justin Ma, Plant
Breeder and Geneticist Anita Sanz, psychologist, grief counselor
Suzanne is a Most Viewed Writer in Evolutionary Biology.

Excellent question. And before I explain the real answer, which is rather mind-bending,
here are some previous arguments and why they are wrong.
Myth 1: We die to make room for younger generations.
Genes are selfish, and each individual body is a vehicle for a collection of genes. These genes

are selected to favor the survival of copies of themselves. Since parents and offspring use the
same resources, the death of a parent creates room ecologically for just one offspring. Each
gene in the parent has a 50% chance of appearing in this offspring. But it has a 100% chance
of appearing in the parent, because it's already there. It's never, then, in the evolutionary
interests of a parent to die so an offspring can replace it.
Myth 2: We die because our cells/DNA get damaged with age.
This like saying bad drivers die because of blood loss. It's a proximate mechanism of death,
not the evolutionary cause of mortality.
Our somatic cells (the cells that are part of our body) do indeed suffer occasional mutations
as they divide. These mutations can kill or damage cells, which is annoying but not generally
a big problem as we can make more. However, the worst mutations do something much
more dangerous: they help cells to survive and proliferate. That's how you get cancer.
Because this risk accumulates over time, cells are normally allowed only a limited number of
divisions before they undergo cellular senescence, that is, they die. But the genes that cause
cellular senescence can also stop working. So that's one of the ways in which we get old: our
somatic cell lineages get older, damaged and mutated, and some become cancerous.
However, the cell/DNA damage idea assumes that this isn't something evolution can
counteract. And that's clearly false. Lifespan and cancer rates differ between species, and
not in the ways you would expect if they were determined by cell/DNA damage. For
instance, once you take into account body size and phylogeny, DNA repair doesn't correlate
with lifespan. Lifespan does, however, correlate with ecology: mammal species who typically
lead risky lives die younger (even if you protect them from those risks). At one extreme, in
the harsh Australian bush we find the male agile antechinus, who dies of stress at the end of
a single breeding season. At the other extreme, the naked mole rat can live for three decades
in its peaceful underground colonies.
This gets even more puzzling when you start to look at genomics. We have a whole suite of
genes devoted to keeping our genome pristine. My favorite is a clever gene called P53 that
acts as a "gatekeeper" for cell division. If the cell has too many mutations, P53 will halt
division and activate repair mechanisms. If that doesn't fix things, it will make the cell
commit suicide. Mutations that break P53 are involved in about half of all human cancers.
Now, here's the rub: there's a whole family of genes related to P53 in other mammals, and
some work better than others. Naked mole rats, as it happens, have two particularly
awesome versions that completely protect them against cancer.
We also know that it's perfectly feasible for genetic modification to immortalize cell
lineages, and that going through a haploid stage is not essential for maintaining cell
viability. How do we know this? From the strange case of the 11,000 year old dog. The dog
as an individual is long dead, but her cells survive today as an infectious cancer on other
dogs' genitalia. There's also a quaking aspen in Utah whose roots are at least 80,000 years
old.
The same applies to permanent organ damage. Some organs heal and regenerate, some
don't. Some species can regenerate organs that others can't. A salamander can grow a whole
new leg. There's even a jellyfish that can reverse its development when it's damaged. All in
all, natural selection is clearly capable of creating creatures who can fix cellular and DNA

damage and repair damaged organs.

So: evolution can fix these problems for us, and it doesn't. What the heck, evolution, aren't
we friends?
Well, no, actually, evolution is not our friend. If anything, it's our genes' friend. And there's
a very good reason our genes don't actually care about us.
Mutations are a problem evolution can fix. But death isn't. Accidents happen. Diseases
happen. Sabre-toothed cats happen (well, not any more, but you get the point). No matter
how hard our genes try to help us survive, sometimes they're going to fail. These failures are
often, as far as your genes are concerned, random. And that means our genes can't afford to
get too invested in the survival of any individual. In the long term, the only way a gene can
survive is to spread -- to copy itself through a population.
So from a gene's-eye view, every investment in your survival is a potential trade-off with the
creation and survival of your potential descendants. And, rather obviously, the more likely
you are to die randomly, the less it makes sense for your genes to invest in the survival side
of the equation.
Every day of your life, the Universe in effect rolls a pair of many-sided dice. Snake eyes,
you're dead. Every day the probability that the Universe has at some point in the past killed
you increases. And at some time after your birth, on average, you're dead.
Look at this from your genes' perspective. Your genes don't know about you specifically,
their behavior is selected based on statistics. They don't want to invest in somebody who is,
on average, dead. Younger people are, on average, more likely to be alive. So if your genes
have to choose between investing in (on average) the survival and/or reproduction of young
you versus old you, they'll pick young you.
And quite often they do have to choose. Early in development, for instance, you really need
genes that allow lots of cellular proliferation. Your body can't grow without it. But too much
cellular proliferation when you're fully-grown is a big problem. So it's a delicate balance,
and what's good for you when you're a kid can be bad for you when you're grown up. There
are other genes that manage these risks by switching genes on and off throughout your life,
but that makes the network even more complex and failure-prone. You end up with an
intricate genomic dance going on throughout your whole life. So it's hardly surprising that
some genes end up helping you now and harming you later.
One example may be Huntington's Disease, a horrible dominant genetic disorder that slowly
destroys your brain and kills you. The disease usually starts to affect people in middle age.
However, young people with the Huntington's gene have more children on average. It's
thought that the Huntington's gene strengthens the immune system by increasing activity of
P53, making them healthier and more fertile. Other possible examples include
atherosclerosis, sarcopenia, prostate hypertrophy, osteoporosis, carcinoma and Alzheimer's
disease.
As life goes on, your genes effectively stop caring what happens to you. After a certain point,
it's so unlikely that you're still alive that your genes can safely assume you'll already be dead.

So your genomic programming can contain all sorts of wacky stuff that only kicks in after
this point, just because there's no noticeable selection against it.
The really fascinating part (by which I mean the really depressing part) is how this effect
reinforces itself. The more likely it is that you're dead, the less your genes care about you.
The less your genes care about you, the more likely it is that you're dead. And this has been
going on throughout our evolutionary history, so we've accumulated all sorts of weird
malfunctions that kick in late in our lives. The human genome is riddled with them, and
most of the genes involved are also part of normal development and reproduction. These
malfunctions cluster around a certain age: the age when evolution stops caring about us
because, statistically speaking, we're already dead.
So mortality is an evolutionary prophecy that fulfills itself in a multitude of ways. And that's
why there's no single key to eternal life. Poor old Gilgamesh.
A review of the evolutionary theory of aging
The evolutionary genetics of ageing and longevity
Huntington's Disease: http://www.sciencedaily.com/rele...
More possible examples of antagonistic pleiotropy in human diseases:
A Darwinian-evolutionary concept of age-related diseases
Antagonistic pleiotropy as a widespread mechanism for the maintenance of polymorphic
disease alleles
The 11,000 year old dog
Page on sciencedaily.com
The 80,000 year old quaking aspen
National Park Service
The jellyfish that reverses its development
The Immortal Jellyfish
Aging in different mammal species is related to environmental vulnerability:
Mammalian Aging, Metabolism, and Ecology: Evidence From the Bats and Marsupials
Large-brained mammals live longer
Longevity in mollusc species correlates with life history traits:
Maximum Shell Size, Growth Rate, and Maturation Age Correlate With Longevity in Bivalve
Molluscs
DNA repair doesn't explain longevity of species (when body size is factored in):
DNA Repair and the Evolution of Longevity: A Critical Analysis
Anti-oxidant activity also doesn't explain longevity differences between species:
Antioxidant enzyme activities are not broadly correlated with longevity in 14 vertebrate
endotherm species
Updated 3 Aug View Upvotes