Tony,
> > 
> > I haven't forgotten your post, I've been trying to find a new job (among MANY other pursuits) and the last few days I've only had time to read David's book and plan on responding to your post here before I fly to MX wednesday. 
> > 
> > Thanks!
> 
> What kind of work do you do(normally)? Good luck with the job hunt!-The short version is that I'm a Software Engineer. (Hence my familiarity with all things math.) But the kind of work I've done since graduation is mostly automated software Quality Assurance; I write programs that run programs. -Prior to computers I had planned on getting a PhD in Pharmacology, until I decided that I didn't like performing chemistry all that much. (Two summers doing lab work bored me.) -My first love was always music, specifically songwriting. As a kid I had notebooks and notebooks full of lyrics... finding creative ways to express abstract ideas through sound and word. And when I lost touch with that part of myself after starting college... I faltered really badly. It was a class that introduced me to Nietzsche that both taught me how to read as well as started moving my mind again in what I would consider a "spiritual" direction. (To understand an essay from Nietzsche, it almost always requires a "third eye." N's thought was heavily influenced by the Bible, and Emerson. I took the techniques I learned from N and started applying that to all sorts of things, and in the grand scheme I've come off better for it.-I tell you all of that as it gets pretty easy to be written off by humanities folks as a scientist/engineer.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"

We also know that there has not been such an expansion of new life since that point, and in fact we have lost over a third of all pre-existing phyla. 
> > 
> > I think that number is higher... if I remember right we have 35 now, and there were some 200 at the Cambrian. -
In Canada about 57 initial phyla, not 200. But with the new shales being explored in Australia and China more missing (now) phyla are present in the Cambrian. The explosion occurred all over the Earth.

The fox domestication study has doubters:

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/russian-foxes-tameness-domestication

"For the last 60 years, scientists in Siberia have bred silver foxes to be increasingly tame, with the goal of revealing the evolutionary and genetic underpinnings of domestication. This research also famously showed a link between tameness and such physical changes as curled tails and spotted coats, known as “domestication syndrome.”

"But that story is flawed, some researchers now claim. The foxes weren’t totally wild to begin with, and some of the traits attributed to domestication existed long before the experiment began, Elinor Karlsson, a biologist at the University of Massachusetts Medical School in Worcester, and her colleagues argue. What’s more, the researchers cast doubt on whether domestication syndrome even exists, in a paper published online December 3 in Trends in Ecology and Evolution.

***

"It’s no secret that the foxes weren’t truly “wild,” Karlsson says. The Soviet foxes originally came from fur farms on Prince Edward Island in Canada, with selective breeding dating back to at least the 1880s. One of Karlsson’s colleagues, on vacation on the island, stumbled across fur farm photographs from the 1920s during a visit to a local museum. Those foxes appeared tame with spotted coats — one of the same domestication traits claimed as a by-product of the Russian experiment that supposedly took generations to emerge.

***

"Dispute aside, Karlsson says she still views the fox experiment as tremendously important. Belyaev and his colleagues “were remarkably successful in selecting on behavioral traits and showing that they can create populations that have very different behaviors,” she says, noting that this has spurred ongoing research into the genetic and neurological elements to these behavioral changes (SN: 8/6/18).

***

"Going forward, Karlsson thinks that research on domestication would be well-served by stepping away from domestication syndrome and thinking more about how these animals may be self-domesticating, driving their own modifications by adapting to people. As human influence grows in wild spaces, many species are likely changing in response to us, she says.

“'Rather than worrying about our assumptions for what domestication is, looking at how species are changing to adapt to our presence would be — in some ways — a more intriguing way to think about the problem,” Karlsson says."

Comment: It is obvious that domestication must start with animals that tend to be somewhat friendly.

Tony,
> > 
> First, I have not once stated that I am a Christian or a Buddhist. I was raised in a Christian family, and in a predominantly Christian society, but that is not the same thing. I study religion, all religion, all faiths and philosophies, so that I can gain a better understanding because I believe that they all fundamentally teach the same things, and that there is something that can be learned from all of them. 
> -I didn't mean to paint you as either one, but I know your early training was as a Christian (as was my own). I've been some level of Buddhist since about 2003, one could say I became a "convert" almost immediately upon hearing the "Four Noble Truths. But my studies have taken me also through every main religion, though most of the truth I've found has resided in the more esoteric ones; Kabbalah, even Luciferian paths as suggested before. On my plate in the near future is the Kitab 'i Aqdas. -> For the Christian, though, their God, the one they admire and attempt to be like, shows numerous examples of the righteous indignation that warranted violence. (Notice how many folks got the crap kicked out of them for messing with God's children...)
> 
> I actually have one disagreement with the Buddhist, so I am glad this came up. The fact that a Buddhist refuses to fight for the protection of life, even the life of another, could be seen as indifference to it, not appreciation of it. One thing about the Abrahamic religions and Hinduism that I really appreciate is that they recognize this. This is also the point I was trying to make in my earlier statement. Self-sacrifice, in the sense of Christ or someone giving up their life for someone else, is difference. It means you love someone so completely that you view their well being and happiness as intrinsic to your own, and place great value upon it, in fact, you value it more than your own life. This is far and away different than refusing violence.-It's funny you brought this up, because until about 6 months ago the biggest reason I had stopped practicing Buddhism was because I viewed it as too pacificistic; however I needed a reality check. Every major martial art that was born in the east (Japan, China, Korea, etc.) is directly connected to the Buddhist religion by their links to the Shaolin. Especially when you begin dealing with the Shaolin, you adhere to these rules:-1. You will never be the aggressor in a conflict. 
2. You will attempt to solve disagreements without combat.
3. Barring that you will only do what you must to incapacitate your opponent.
4. Never kill. -Ju Jitsu (the father of all Japanese and Korean martial arts) directly translates to "The Gentle Art." (I have 6 years each between Judo and Ju Jitsu.) -In Buddhist ethics:
War is always wrong. A practicing Buddhist will work to end the suffering caused by war. This was explicit in the Buddha's teaching itself:-"Even if thieves carve you limb from limb with a double-handed saw, if you make your mind hostile you are not following my teaching." (Dhammapada)-When you compare this with Christian Martyrs... you see a marked similarity.-But note what you don't see here. It doesn't say you can't protect yourself. It doesn't say you can't keep others from harm. It says that you cannot have a hostile mind. There is a difference. -I didn't understand the necessity of this kind of thinking until recently, after having read about Christian asceticism. If life is truly sacred; we should never end it under any circumstance, no matter how much it hurts. Contrast this with Luciferian paths where direct retribution is demanded, you realize why. The emotions of hatred and anger are fleeting, they satiate your blood, but only temporarily. More importantly, you continue the chain of violence in the world. -I have come to agree that the only salvation for man is to recognize that altruistic love & forgiveness really are the only things that can make positive changes in human affairs. (Father Zossima deeply impacted me...) But so too has St. John of the Cross.-I will be happy to discuss the other threads later, but for now I must get to bed. I have a CT scan in the morning.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"