0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 09/01/2014 18:15:47... i can jump in in any discussion here whatsoever ,unless you would mind me doing so, via some sort of weird materialist inquisitory veto of some sort ....You can jump in anywhere you like; a thoughtful contribution to the discussion would be particularly appreciated, if entirely unexpected...
... i can jump in in any discussion here whatsoever ,unless you would mind me doing so, via some sort of weird materialist inquisitory veto of some sort ....
QuoteP.S.: Do you think anti-matter does really exist in space somewhere ?Yes, of course - in fact there's more antimatter than was expected.
P.S.: Do you think anti-matter does really exist in space somewhere ?
QuoteAnti-matter plays a significant role in "Angels and Demons " fictitious thriller by Dan Brown .Dan Brown tells entertaining stories, but he doesn't let scientific knowledge, accuracy, or plausibility get in the way []
Anti-matter plays a significant role in "Angels and Demons " fictitious thriller by Dan Brown .
QuoteHow can such an intelligent and erudite scientist such as yourself assume that consciousness is just brain activity , or that consciousness has no effects on matter ?Lol! yeah, right - so now I've suddenly gone from a narrow-minded idiot hypocrit(sic) materialist whose views and arguments are worthless and which you will not read; and a "false deceptive missionnary jesuit priest selling illusions, delusions , lies ,deceit, half-truths", to an intelligent and erudite scientist []In answer to your question - I've already explained my views on that.
How can such an intelligent and erudite scientist such as yourself assume that consciousness is just brain activity , or that consciousness has no effects on matter ?
Quotewhy do you reject the subjective nature of QT as explicitly expressed by its founders and by other great minds such as Stapp and others ?I've already explained my views on that.
why do you reject the subjective nature of QT as explicitly expressed by its founders and by other great minds such as Stapp and others ?
QuoteHow can you deny the undeniable fact that the mind -matter separation is a scientific myth ?, and hence the mind does always intervene in the physical realityI've already explained my views on that too.That you appear to have understood very little of it is unfortunate, but rather than ask for explanation, you were typically insulting. Your choice.
How can you deny the undeniable fact that the mind -matter separation is a scientific myth ?, and hence the mind does always intervene in the physical reality
I could equally ask you how you can assert the converse for each of those questions, but I've tried it several times already and you had nothing to offer but insults and uncommented tracts from fringe works.
If the extreme swings of mood and emotion shown in your posts are an honest reflection of changes in your mental state, I strongly recommend you to see a qualified mental health professional
Quote from: jeffreyH on 10/01/2014 00:40:41I don't see the point as it would get lost in all the mud slinging going on. I am sure you will agree. I despair sometimes.The mud-slinging only relates to one individual
I don't see the point as it would get lost in all the mud slinging going on. I am sure you will agree. I despair sometimes.
the rest of us have managed a few islands of productive rational discussion in between;
but I see your point - we need some sensible moderation here...
Quote from: cheryl j on 09/01/2014 20:24:56So basically what you’re saying is “I expect you to read the excerpts that support my view, but I’m not interested in reading any of your references. Not only that but, if you even raise questions about any of my sources, I won’t discuss it, but simply tell you to re-read it, followed by insults and ridicule for not agreeing with me.” He was clearer about it here:Quote from: DonQuichotte on 08/01/2014 18:23:49... I will not read any materialist views on the subject...
So basically what you’re saying is “I expect you to read the excerpts that support my view, but I’m not interested in reading any of your references. Not only that but, if you even raise questions about any of my sources, I won’t discuss it, but simply tell you to re-read it, followed by insults and ridicule for not agreeing with me.”
... I will not read any materialist views on the subject...
The “scientific worldview”
Bye .....forever, i mean it this time .
Yeah, right , materialism has been assuming that consciousness is just neuronal brain activity , silly me .What has all that to do with science ? Has the latter ever been able to link our own subjective conscious states experiences ... to neurons or to ensemble of neurons ? Obviously ...not .And how can neurochemistry ever give rise to qualitative subjective conscious experiences ,states ...?
Today from Science Daily:Discovery of Quantum Vibrations in 'Microtubules' Inside Brain Neurons Supports Controversial Theory of Consciousnesshttp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140116085105.htm
Just been reading a Schrodinger biography and he believed in a collective unconsciousness. Just thought I'd add that.
I think just neurons and neurotransmitters can make consciousness.