[coberst (OP)]

Are Internet discussion forums the answer?

When asked about the origin of consciousness it appears to be conventional wisdom to respond, “Language did it”.

“I believe it is legitimate to take the phrase “I know” and deduce from it the presence of a nonverbal image of knowing centered on the self that precedes and motivates that verbal phrase…The idea that self and consciousness would emerge after language, and would be a direct construction of language, is not likely to be correct.”

Our sluggish ability to adapt quickly to changes in our environment severely endangers the longevity of the human species: it takes generations for new human science theories to migrate into mass common sense comprehension.

Internet discussion forums are the answer. 

What is the question?

How can we dramatically enhance the speed of the social osmosis of new human science theories?

Quotes from The Feeling of What Happens by Antonio Damasio

[Make it Lady]

So you are asking how do we market science?

Scientists have done a really crappy job of it in the past but more recently they have used the media to make sure science misinformation doesn't stop good change. Stem Cell research is an example of when they finally got it right. Hell, forums are small fry. Less people visit them because time is a limiting factor for visits to them. If a forum summary facility was available then perhaps more people would learn from them. Most websites can do this but not forums.

[Ethos]

Are Internet discussion forums the answer?

Only for the curious with a lot of time on their hands.

When asked about the origin of consciousness it appears to be conventional wisdom to respond, “Language did it”.

I must respectfully disagree with this view. Consciousness came before language in my opinion. The very word "I" must have been one of the first words and it proves the presence of consciousness prior to it's invention.

[coberst (OP)]

Are Internet discussion forums the answer?

Only for the curious with a lot of time on their hands.

When asked about the origin of consciousness it appears to be conventional wisdom to respond, “Language did it”.

I must respectfully disagree with this view. Consciousness came before language in my opinion. The very word "I" must have been one of the first words and it proves the presence of consciousness prior to it's invention.

If you had read the next paragraph you would see both Damsio and I are convinced that we think in images and not in words.

I am suggesting that the discussion forum is a vehicle that can be very useful if we were to use it in a more sophisticated manner than it is now used.  The forum does not have to be confined to idle chit chat.  If we were to begin to use it in a sophisticated manner we could attract sophisticated individuals or individuals who wished to grow into sophisticated thinkers.  It could grow to be a very important means for intellectual discourse.

[Variola]

I am suggesting that the discussion forum is a vehicle that can be very useful if we were to use it in a more sophisticated manner than it is now used.  The forum does not have to be confined to idle chit chat.  If we were to begin to use it in a sophisticated manner we could attract sophisticated individuals or individuals who wished to grow into sophisticated thinkers.  It could grow to be a very important means for intellectual discourse.

For that you need to have posters who are commited to what they post and are willing and able to engage in debate/discourse without dismissing everyone who disagrees with them, or by ignoring points they they want to gloss over.


What makes you think tht the people here don't use other forums to stimulate their intellect? I know I do, it's not classed as being unfaithful to indulge in intellectual intercourse elsewhere.

[neilep]

Have you even looked at other threads in this forum ?

there are plenty discussions of uber sophistication !!....only parts of the forum are for play !!

You're right, the forum does not have to be a vehicle for idle chit chat...but idle chit chat is very important too !...'Play ' is vital !

There are many sophisticated threads here !

[Make it Lady]

I think "Just Chat" is for improving your sophisticated wit. You ought to try and find a philosophy forum. I think you will find the posters more committed to your points on topics like critical thinking. I will do some research and see if I can find a suitable one for you. I must say that here you are a square peg in a round hole. We are not really interested in your line of discussion. You may think you are being evangelistic but you only have to see how Saints met their end to realise it is not going to do you any good. Most of us here will talk about science related subjects in the relevant sections but in "just chat" we kick off our shoes and party. No one likes an intellectual bore at a party.   

[neilep]

I think "Just Chat" is for improving your sophisticated wit. You ought to try and find a philosophy forum. I think you will find the posters more committed to your points on topics like critical thinking. I will do some research and see if I can find a suitable one for you. I must say that here you are a square peg in a round hole. We are not really interested in your line of discussion. You may think you are being evangelistic but you only have to see how Saints met their end to realise it is not going to do you any good. Most of us here will talk about science related subjects in the relevant sections but in "just chat" we kick off our shoes and party. No one likes an intellectual bore at a party.   

Yeah...what shaz said !..shaz is great !





I'm also great !

[Herman Melville]

I am suggesting that the discussion forum is a vehicle that can be very useful if we were to use it in a more sophisticated manner than it is now used.  The forum does not have to be confined to idle chit chat.  If we were to begin to use it in a sophisticated manner we could attract sophisticated individuals or individuals who wished to grow into sophisticated thinkers.  It could grow to be a very important means for intellectual discourse.

Just to echo the other posters here, I think this is missing the point entirely. There's plenty of very stimulating "intellectual discourse" in the various sections of the forum. You can always avoid "Just Chat" if it fails to reach your levels of sophistication.

[Herman Melville]

I think "Just Chat" is for improving your sophisticated wit. You ought to try and find a philosophy forum. I think you will find the posters more committed to your points on topics like critical thinking. I will do some research and see if I can find a suitable one for you.

If you Google:

'Are Internet discussion forums the answer? coberst'

you will find that this exact same question has been pasted by Coberst on several forums already. In fact, the same is true of all Coberst's threads. It would be nice if he would explain his reasons for this multiple posting thing.

[Variola]

you will find that this exact same question has been pasted by Coberst on several forums already. In fact, the same is true of all Coberst's threads. It would be nice if he would explain his reasons for this multiple posting thing.

Its interesting to read the reactions of the posters on the other forums to Cobersts posts, seems like they have had enough too.

I am suggesting that the discussion forum is a vehicle that can be very useful if we were to use it in a more sophisticated manner than it is now used.  The forum does not have to be confined to idle chit chat.  If we were to begin to use it in a sophisticated manner we could attract sophisticated individuals or individuals who wished to grow into sophisticated thinkers.  It could grow to be a very important means for intellectual discourse.

That has been posted on all the other forums too.

[Ethos]

If you had read the next paragraph you would see both Damsio and I are convinced that we think in images and not in words.

Duhhhh, which exactly proves my point; Consciousness came before words! Something tells me that you may have trouble understanding plain English sir!

[coberst (OP)]

If you had read the next paragraph you would see both Damsio and I are convinced that we think in images and not in words.

Duhhhh, which exactly proves my point; Consciousness came before words! Something tells me that you may have trouble understanding plain English sir!

Correct, consciousness comes before language.  My point is that if you had someone to read to you the complete OP you would have recognized this fact.

[Ethos]

If you had read the next paragraph you would see both Damsio and I are convinced that we think in images and not in words.

Duhhhh, which exactly proves my point; Consciousness came before words! Something tells me that you may have trouble understanding plain English sir!

Correct, consciousness comes before language.  My point is that if you had someone to read to you the complete OP you would have recognized this fact.

And the point most of we members are making is this:

The Chat forum is no place to exercise one's theories about Philosophy or Metaphysics or any other serious topic with intentions of revolutionizing the world view, or for that matter, any particular forum members opinion either. If you want serious discussion, and I doubt that seriously, take your views over to the appropriate venue. And don't come here with that superior Intellectual attitude instructing us to re-read, what in most cases is, useless material in the Chat Forum.

Keep this in mind coberst and you may have a chance to make a few friends here. If you neglect to give this advice it's proper attention, you will find nothing but grief and disrespect from most of us here at The Naked Scientist!!!!

Nuff said....................Ethos

[Make it Lady]

Could this thread please be moved to New Theories please.

[lyner]

I'd love to know the rationale behind this thread constituting a "New Theory".
Is there a testable model of any kind suggested here?

[Ethos]

Could this thread please be moved to New Theories please.

Bravo!! [^] [^] [^]

[JimBob]

When asked about the origin of consciousness it appears to be conventional wisdom to respond, “Language did it”.

NO - This is incorrect assertion, invalidating the whole question.

This question is based on a poor, limited  understanding of the concept of consciousness. Before any form of consciousness could arise, a sense of self had to evolve. A dog, when confronted with a mirror, does not recognize that they are the thing being reflected. A chimpanzee, on the other hand, will also not recognize that they are reflected but with time will figure out that the object being reflected is itself and thus a sense of self is developed. ONLY when this sens of individualization occurs does consciousness come into existence.

HOW this sense of self evolved is a matter of intense discussion and very little agreement. The answer to this depends on the approach one takes to the question. A neurological approach yeilds one answer, an evolutionary biological approach yields another. Philosophical approachs yield numerous answers. From Descartes's  'cogito ergo sum' to Biblical creationism to the first of the Shiva Sutras of Vasugupta, that being transliterated as "Chaitanyamatma" ('Everything is Consciousness' in the translation I prefer) to the numerous other disciplines, there is no consensus.

The assumption that science is good to propagate, especially without a ethical foundation, is also a specious assumption.

Therefore this question is really unanswerable. It needs to be recast.

[lyner]

Could this thread please be moved to New Theories please.

Bravo!! [^] [^] [^]

OK then. Perhaps we need another Forum with a title like 'general philosophy' for 'serious chat' which is not just light banter. There is an essentIal difference between that and the catch-all 'new theories' but both are serious topics.

[Variola]

Could this thread please be moved to New Theories please.

Bravo!! [^] [^] [^]

OK then. Perhaps we need another Forum with a title like 'general philosophy' for 'serious chat' which is not just light banter. There is an essential difference between that and the catch-all 'new theories' but both are serious topics.

Indeed none of Coberst's posts are new theories at all, usually they are chunks of texts from various books cobbled together, certainly nothing new.
It doesn't belong in a philosophy forum either, those require much depth of discussion, something not associated with Coberst's posts.

Perhaps there should be a 'general musings' forum, where Coberst can post without interrupting the chat section or without objections from posts being in the wrong section.