0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Has nothing to do with that, not really .
Quote from: Supercryptid on 18/11/2013 22:09:37So this'll be my final post in this thread.That's what everyone else ought to do too, so this will be my final post in any of these silly threads.
So this'll be my final post in this thread.
Quote from: cheryl j on 19/11/2013 18:17:02Quote from: DonQuichotte on 19/11/2013 17:50:00Has nothing to do with that, not really . I am happy for you that it is not actually a language problem, but disappointed that it has been a matter of deliberate obscurification on your part all along. Avoiding questions or making ambiguous statements does not prevent others from seeing logical inconsistencies and lack of evidence for your position - they are still glaringly obvious.
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 19/11/2013 17:50:00Has nothing to do with that, not really .
Well, let me say one last thing. This is just to clarify my stance, not to continue the debate.I can accept the idea that consciousness (that is, the experience of qualia itself), is an immaterial thing. You can't put consciousness in a box or a test tube. The idea that consciousness itself is a physical object or substance wouldn't make much sense. What I do believe is that human consciousness is inextricably linked to the human brain.I would also like to point out that there are immaterial things that are generally accepted. Numbers and logic itself are two such examples.
On the other hand, shouting incoherent rantings into the ether is symptomatic of syphilis,
so there may be a madness to his method.
Well, let me say one last thing. This is just to clarify my stance, not to continue the debate.
I can accept the idea that consciousness (that is, the experience of qualia itself), is an immaterial thing. You can't put consciousness in a box or a test tube. The idea that consciousness itself is a physical object or substance wouldn't make much sense.
What I do believe is that human consciousness is inextricably linked to the human brain.
I would also like to point out that there are immaterial things that are generally accepted. Numbers and logic itself are two such examples.
Quote from: Supercryptid on 19/11/2013 21:54:44Well, let me say one last thing. This is just to clarify my stance, not to continue the debate.I can accept the idea that consciousness (that is, the experience of qualia itself), is an immaterial thing. You can't put consciousness in a box or a test tube. The idea that consciousness itself is a physical object or substance wouldn't make much sense. What I do believe is that human consciousness is inextricably linked to the human brain.I would also like to point out that there are immaterial things that are generally accepted. Numbers and logic itself are two such examples.I agree with you. But Don has never explained or defined his concept of the immaterial. From the all of his posts, it appears to be a mystical catch-all concept and nothing definite, or nothing he is willing to define, because someone might disprove it, or worse, decide it is just inconsequential.
I doubt Don's immaterial has very much in common with an isosceles triangle or Pi, which are also immaterial, but can be described in very specific ways.
Don has gotten a lot of attention on this forum. I can't help but notice that the conversation dies down on these particular threads when he disappears. At the same time, he doesn't understand that you don't change people's thinking or create a "paradigm shift" by beating people with a stick and saying "Wrong, wrong, wrong!" You convince them by offering them alternative theories, with in depth explanation of those ideas and evidence for them, that are more convincing than the theories they had.
The immaterial can , per definition, not be defined as such ,sis , come on , be serious: that's the main trouble with it ,
The main trouble with western thought is that almost all its knowledge is conceptual : that's no serious way to apprehend reality as a whole .
I do believe that consciousness the self or soul do permeate every atom , cell and organ of ours within and without
If anyone is throwing their presumed scientific knowledge out of their window, please let me know. I may have a use for it. Thank you.
What incoherent rantings then ? Can you be more specific , genius ?There is in fact nothing more absurd insane surreal ...you name it , sis ...than the false mainstream materialist 'scientific world view " .
Not all of it , of course , just the materialist crap in it though,as i said ( I said most of one's presumed "scientific" knowledge.) : you might turn out to be not interested in the latter, after all .
To try to explain reality as a whole just via its physical or material side ,is not only an idiotic absurd surreal ...you name it ...attempt
Not all of it , of course , just the materialist crap in it though,as i said
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 20/11/2013 17:19:30What incoherent rantings then ? Can you be more specific , genius ?There is in fact nothing more absurd insane surreal ...you name it , sis ...than the false mainstream materialist 'scientific world view " .
So ? There is nothing more insane surreal absurd ,nothing more stupid and idiotic ...you name it ...than the current mainstream false "scientific world view " that has been assuming that reality is just material or physical ,including the mental thus , thanks to materialism .Is reality just that then , genius ? just material or physical ?When has science ever proved that core materialist "fact ", or rather that materialist core belief assumption to be "true " that reality is just material or physical then ? When , how ? absurd .Materialism that does go beyond science , beyond science's realm, beyond the scientific method , beyond science's jurisdiction ,by assuming reality to be just material or physical , by pretending to know the nature of reality as a whole ...already ...by confining science to just that materialist prison , by holding back science from progressing ,by branding as a scientific heresy any scientific attempts to try to reveal the mental or non-physical side of reality ....Outdated and superseded materialism that dates back to the 19th century , materialism that's just a false conception of nature , just a world view, a philsophy ...no science .
Then take Ethos up on his challenge. Should be as easy as shooting fish in a barrel for someone who has been freed from the materialist world view and false conception of nature.