What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?

  • 1733 Replies
  • 315590 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #750 on: 06/11/2013 18:57:56 »

I used to make a mistake when i used to say that science can deal only with the material (I see i was also a relative victim of materialism in science thus ) , science can rather deal with all it can observe, test , study ...empirically + not everything can be explained just via the laws of physics , not everything is just a matter of cause and effect thus , as mechanistic materialism  assumes (Major examples ? : science cannot handle the nature or origins of consciousness,of  human intellect ,of  feelings ,of  emotions , of memory ....science cannot handle the nature and origin of human conscience , science cannot explain life as a whole just via physics and chemistry , let alone life's origins , evolution and emergence ...fully) .



 
Science has been assuming that everything is material physical, thanks to materialism  = everything can be explained just by the laws of physics , or just by physics and chemistry , so, everything that would have  "supernatural " claims would be , per definition, not only branded as unscientific , but also as ...false , including the claims of religions ....
While science in fact should restrict itself only to what it can deal with empirically...
....Science has been assuming that everything is material physical, thanks to materialism  = everything can be explained just by the laws of physics , or just by physics and chemistry , so, everything that would have  "supernatural " claims would be , per definition, not only branded as unscientific , but also as ...false , including the claims of religions ....
While science in fact should restrict itself only to what it can deal with empirically .


So science is responsible for including the immaterial in its conceptual framework of why things happen or how things happen,  but it can't criticize ideas about the immaterial or falsify the immaterial in any way? Are you familiar with the phrase "writing a blank check"?
[/quote]

Try to read carefully what i try to say : i do my best to clarify my statements : do yours in relation to yours as well, otherwise , this discussion would become absurd = an understatement thus .

I said , science cannot be confined to just the material side of reality it has been taking as the whole real thing, thanks to materialism thus  .
So, science must therefore try to deal with the parts of reality it can deal with empirically , including some   parts of the immaterial side of reality indirectly , such as the the telepathy claims of some people , such as the psychic claims of some  people , such as dealing empirically with the natures and origins of consciousness, memory , feelings , emotions , human intellect .....indirectly and not as physical biological material processes ...they are not ,obviously.

*

Offline cheryl j

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1460
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #751 on: 06/11/2013 19:11:14 »

We are not talking here about God .

Well, just for discussion's sake , the following then :

God's existence can neither be proved nor disproved ; thousands of years of ancient philosophy , scholastics , modern philosophy ...should have convinced you already of that fact : trying to prove or disprove the existence of God was just a stupid and silly ancient Greek cultural habit that was taken over by christian scholastics , and by modern philosophy ,later on ...

No, we weren't talking about God, but you are the one who changed your mind and now claim that science is somehow responsible for including the immaterial as a possible cause of things or events, even though science per your definition of it cannot evaluate, prove or disprove, the immaterial. That is no different from holding an individual responsible for lack of information that he has no access to and is not allowed to question. It's another contradiction.

*

Offline cheryl j

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1460
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #752 on: 06/11/2013 19:29:02 »


Try to read carefully what i try to say : i do my best to clarify my statements : do yours in relation to yours as well, otherwise , this discussion would become absurd = an understatement thus .

I said , science cannot be confined to just the material side of reality it has been taking as the whole real thing, thanks to materialism thus  .
So, science must therefore try to deal with the parts of reality it can deal with empirically , including some   parts of the immaterial side of reality indirectly , such as the the telepathy claims of some people , such as the psychic claims of some  people , such as dealing empirically with the natures and origins of consciousness, memory , feelings , emotions , human intellect .....indirectly and not as physical biological material processes ...they are not ,obviously.

When science has evaluated psychic phenomena and not delivered the results you want, you simply respond that it cannot adequately refute the immaterial, is not qualified to do so. You have the habit of deciding which "parts of reality it can deal with empirically" afterwards, depending on whether you agree with the conclusions.
« Last Edit: 06/11/2013 19:37:43 by cheryl j »

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #753 on: 06/11/2013 20:35:36 »
... you just resort to attacking non-materialist world views such as religions..
You have so little in response you have to make things up?  Or can you quote me 'attacking' non-materialist world views such as religions?

Quote
You just resort to saying : my materialist belief is better than yours = what kindda silly childish 'reasoning " is this then ? Amazing .
Confabulation. Care to quote me saying any such thing?
« Last Edit: 06/11/2013 20:41:44 by dlorde »

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #754 on: 06/11/2013 20:41:04 »
... science must therefore try to deal with the parts of reality it can deal with empirically , including some   parts of the immaterial side of reality indirectly , such as the the telepathy claims of some people , such as the psychic claims of some  people , such as dealing empirically with the natures and origins of consciousness, memory , feelings , emotions , human intellect .....indirectly and not as physical biological material processes ...they are not ,obviously.
Which is exactly what science has been, and is, doing. Telepathy and psychic claims have come up a blank, the rest is under ongoing investigation. So far, no trace of influence from 'the immaterial side of reality' has been found.

What should science be doing differently?

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #755 on: 06/11/2013 21:18:00 »
dlorde , Cheryl :

Time up, sorry :

Try to read carefully what i say , once again :

I said science will be able to expand its realm ...when science will be liberated from materialism , not earlier : the materialist current 'scientific world view " would , per definition, only dismiss non-material non-physical non-biological processes , or would just reduce them to material physical biological ones : major examples ? : consciousness , human intellect , the immaterial side of life , the nature of feelings emotions ......the nature of human love ...

So, i talk about what science actually is  and therefore should be , without materialism thus ...when science will cease thus to reduce the whole reality to just physics and chemistry ,once again .

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #756 on: 06/11/2013 21:52:31 »
... I said science will be able to expand its realm ...when science will be liberated from materialism , not earlier : the materialist current 'scientific world view " would , per definition, only dismiss non-material non-physical non-biological processes , or would just reduce them to material physical biological ones : major examples ? : consciousness , human intellect , the immaterial side of life , the nature of feelings emotions ......the nature of human love ...

So, i talk about what science actually is  and therefore should be , without materialism thus ...when science will cease thus to reduce the whole reality to just physics and chemistry ,once again .
If science is suffering from a "mechanistic materialist world view ideology" or has been dominated by a "materialist mechanist dogmatic belief system", then please explain how it has suffered, and how it would be different without it (e.g. how would it work?), and how it could be better as a result.

*

Offline cheryl j

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1460
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #757 on: 07/11/2013 00:00:15 »
dlorde , Cheryl :

Time up, sorry :

Try to read carefully what i say , once again :

I said science will be able to expand its realm ...when science will be liberated from materialism , not earlier : the materialist current 'scientific world view " would , per definition, only dismiss non-material non-physical non-biological processes , or would just reduce them to material physical biological ones : major examples ? : consciousness , human intellect , the immaterial side of life , the nature of feelings emotions ......the nature of human love ...

So, i talk about what science actually is  and therefore should be , without materialism thus ...when science will cease thus to reduce the whole reality to just physics and chemistry ,once again .
That's probably the lamest dodge I've seen so far.

I don't see why all of science must be liberated from materialism first, in order for you to even describe what a liberated scientist might then be free to do, or do differently. After all, it only takes one scientist with one really important discovery to change history. That one scientist doesn't have to get everybody's permission first to think differently. The idea that time wasn't constant must have been radical in 1905 and didn't require a consensus from all of science or society.


*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #758 on: 07/11/2013 16:56:16 »
... I like the quote from Nagel, I personally despise atheists who argue with religious groups about the existence of god, saying there is no proof he exists.. as they forget to close the factual statement of.. There is also no proof that he doesn't
True - although some ideas are so patently absurd they need convincing evidence of their reality to be credible, e.g. Russell's Teapot, Sagan's invisible dragon, the Tooth Fairy, God, etc. As the man said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

(Once again, history of mankind's thought had proved the obvious simple and undeniable fact that God's existence can neither be proved nor disproved ,so, let's just leave it at that then , and that's not our subject either )

Well, materialism is so absurd , so paradoxical, so counter-intuitive, or implausible as Nagel said , so ridiculous , so silly , so childish a "scientific world view " that it is extremely puzzling that materialism has been taken seriously at all , let alone in science : extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence indeed , ironically enough .

Now that you cannot deliver any evidence for the "validity or truth " concerning the materialist mainstream "scientific world view ", that's obviously false , you just resort to attacking non-materialist world views such as religions, we are not talking here about the latter , we are just talking about materialism in science that's obviously false , and nobody said that religions are 'scientific " , as materialism pretends to be : that's the core issue here , if materialism has not been taken for granted as the alleged scientific world view  for so long now  , i would have never bothered raising the irrelevant silly issue of materialism = materialism that assumes that reality as a whole is just material physical  , well  , ironically enough , Nagel said on the subject  of materialism "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"= where is that extraordinary materialist evidence then ? where is that extraprdinary evidence regarding the extraordianry claims of materialism that reality is just material physical then ?

All that Russell's tea pot and the rest of your "arguments " against religion are not only incorrect and false irrelevant in relation to some religions at least  they cannot cover as such  , but they  also miss the point that there are false and true beliefs ,relatively speaking : the belief in Sint Claus is obviously false , my own belief in my mother is obviously true to me at least .......to mention just that , no need to scale it up all the way to religions .

Quote
Quote
the religion of atheism is founded on hypocritical beliefs and statements..
Someone said 'atheism is a religion the way not collecting stamps is a hobby'. As an atheist myself, I'm not aware of having any religious-type organized beliefs, dogmas, rituals or activities. Despite a religious upbringing, I don't believe in god because it seems an absurd, contradictory, ill-defined idea, there's no plausible evidence for it, and a vast amount of circumstantial evidence that it's a product of human imagination. YMMV. If some plausible evidence appears, I'll consider it.

Atheism is obviously a belief , a religion, a conception of nature , a naturalist one at that , a dogmatic orthodox one at that , even in the face of counter-evidence : major example ? materialism in all sciences and elsewhere .

Deliver your  extraordinary evidence regarding the extraordinary claims of the naturalist materialist reductionist determinist conception of nature then ,that gets sold to the people as the 'scientific world view " , deal ?

Besides, you cannot prove the falsehood or truthfulness of a certain belief or religion just via another belief assumption , the materialist one here ,come on : how convenient =   I say your materialist belief is false , and i did provide you with extensive supporting material and other on the subject , what do you do ? You just resort to saying : my materialist belief is better than yours = what kindda silly childish 'reasoning " is this then ? Amazing .
Just address the issue of the false materialist "scientific world view " at hand : religions are not the ones that pretend to be "the scientific world views " , deal ?

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #759 on: 07/11/2013 16:59:21 »
Mod :

Please do have the decency and intelligence to just stop removing or editing some of my posts here on this thread and elsewhere as well i spent so much time on .
You could just remove Nagel's quotes form them, instead of removing the whole thing .
What's wrong with you anyway ?

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #760 on: 07/11/2013 17:05:10 »
dlorde , Cheryl :

Time up, sorry :

Try to read carefully what i say , once again :

I said science will be able to expand its realm ...when science will be liberated from materialism , not earlier : the materialist current 'scientific world view " would , per definition, only dismiss non-material non-physical non-biological processes , or would just reduce them to material physical biological ones : major examples ? : consciousness , human intellect , the immaterial side of life , the nature of feelings emotions ......the nature of human love ...

So, i talk about what science actually is  and therefore should be , without materialism thus ...when science will cease thus to reduce the whole reality to just physics and chemistry ,once again .
That's probably the lamest dodge I've seen so far.

I don't see why all of science must be liberated from materialism first, in order for you to even describe what a liberated scientist might then be free to do, or do differently. After all, it only takes one scientist with one really important discovery to change history. That one scientist doesn't have to get everybody's permission first to think differently. The idea that time wasn't constant must have been radical in 1905 and didn't require a consensus from all of science or society.
[/quote]

Science must be liberated from mainstream materialism, for the simple reason that the latter is false , materialism that's been taken for granted as the 'scientific world view " .
IT is obvously not enough to have some scientists individuals who do challenge that 'scientific world view ": there is a lot more needed to do just that than just some scientists who have been "singing outside of the mainsteram materialist false orchestra" .

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #761 on: 07/11/2013 17:09:11 »
... you just resort to attacking non-materialist world views such as religions..
You have so little in response you have to make things up?  Or can you quote me 'attacking' non-materialist world views such as religions?

Quote
You just resort to saying : my materialist belief is better than yours = what kindda silly childish 'reasoning " is this then ? Amazing .
Confabulation. Care to quote me saying any such thing?
[/quote]

Try to reread what you said earlier then, i did repost for you   here above .

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #762 on: 07/11/2013 18:36:38 »
Try to reread what you said earlier then, i did repost for you   here above .
You won't find quotes of me attacking non-materialist world views such as religions, or saying that my materialist belief is better than yours, because they're not there.

You've clearly interpreted something I've posted as an attack on non-materialist world views, and as suggesting that I think my 'materialist belief' is better than yours, so perhaps you could quote the relevant post(s) so I can explain what I said in words of one syllable.

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #763 on: 07/11/2013 18:40:59 »
Science must be liberated from mainstream materialism, for the simple reason that the latter is false , materialism that's been taken for granted as the 'scientific world view " .
IT is obvously not enough to have some scientists individuals who do challenge that 'scientific world view ": there is a lot more needed to do just that than just some scientists who have been "singing outside of the mainsteram materialist false orchestra" .
So are you going to explain what should science be doing differently? how will it be different when 'liberated from materialism'?

*

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1505
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #764 on: 07/11/2013 18:59:29 »
God's existence can neither be proved nor disproved ; thousands of years of ancient philosophy , scholastics , modern philosophy ...should have convinced you already of that fact : trying to prove or disprove the existence of God was just a stupid and silly ancient Greek cultural habit that was taken over by christian scholastics , and by modern philosophy ,later on ...

God's existence has been disproved. The fact that so many people lack the wit to recognise that fact that he is logically impossible does not negate the fact that he has been disproved, and that he has been disproved by more than one method. These proofs do depend of course on reason being correct - they are rational proofs. God only remains a possibility if you approach it from an irrational standpoint. What is completely wrong though is to claim that God cannot be disproved within the bounds of rationality, because he has been.

Here's another way of proving that he doesn't exist. God did not create the powers by which he creates things, so he is not the creator of all things. Again this means that he fails to qualify as God.

To maintain the belief that God is possible you have to match it with a belief that reason may not be worth anything, at which point you're left floundering in a place where any argument you make is of no value at all. It is a position for people who have given up trying to understand.

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #765 on: 07/11/2013 19:14:58 »
Try to reread what you said earlier then, i did repost for you   here above .
You won't find quotes of me attacking non-materialist world views such as religions, or saying that my materialist belief is better than yours, because they're not there.

You've clearly interpreted something I've posted as an attack on non-materialist world views, and as suggesting that I think my 'materialist belief' is better than yours, so perhaps you could quote the relevant post(s) so I can explain what I said in words of one syllable.
[/quote]

You did not say that explicitly , i just rephrased or reformulated your words on the subject , i did not misinterpret them : reread what you said then .
It's ok to attack religions , aliens , God even , if you want to or can do just that , that's not the point : and that's not the subject of our discussion either .
The point is : i asked you to deliver  some  "extraordinary evidence for the extraordinary claims of materialism regarding the materialist version of reality, the latter that's been taken for granted as the alleged scientific world view  " : but , instead of doing just that , you changed the subject by talking about God and religions in ways i did try to refute .........while religions and God are not our subject of discussion here .
« Last Edit: 07/11/2013 19:17:20 by DonQuichotte »

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #766 on: 07/11/2013 19:30:58 »
God's existence can neither be proved nor disproved ; thousands of years of ancient philosophy , scholastics , modern philosophy ...should have convinced you already of that fact : trying to prove or disprove the existence of God was just a stupid and silly ancient Greek cultural habit that was taken over by christian scholastics , and by modern philosophy ,later on ...

God's existence has been disproved. The fact that so many people lack the wit to recognise that fact that he is logically impossible does not negate the fact that he has been disproved, and that he has been disproved by more than one method. These proofs do depend of course on reason being correct - they are rational proofs. God only remains a possibility if you approach it from an irrational standpoint. What is completely wrong though is to claim that God cannot be disproved within the bounds of rationality, because he has been.

Here's another way of proving that he doesn't exist. God did not create the powers by which he creates things, so he is not the creator of all things. Again this means that he fails to qualify as God.

To maintain the belief that God is possible you have to match it with a belief that reason may not be worth anything, at which point you're left floundering in a place where any argument you make is of no value at all. It is a position for people who have given up trying to understand.
[/quote
]

haha
Depends largely of which world view do you hold or believe in : has nothing to do with reason, science , logic....what you have been saying at least .
Even though God is not our present discussion, the following :
"God's existence has been disproved ? " by whom , by what when how where ?
Congratulations : you are such an unique genius that you have just solved this unsolved mystery even thousands of years of ancient philosophy , cholastics , modern philosophy , could not solve , obviously = God's existence can , obviously , neither be proved nor disproved : trying to either prove or disprove the existence of God was , once again , just an ancient Greek silly stupid cultural habit sport that was taken over by scholastics , and by modern philosophy , later on, in vain .
Even the modern analytical philosophy had already abandoned that 'search " ,for obvious reasons .

Well, when one would consider the current mainstream materialist false conception of nature to be the 'scientific world view ", one can therefore only logically and 'empirically " haha conclude that God does ...not exist, as a result  .
But , reality as a whole , once again , is not just material or physical = materialism in science is false = the materialist "scientific world view " is false = God is obviously and per -definition outside of both science's realm and outside of science's jurisdiction as well .
Sweet dreams then  in your materialist mechanistic wonderland , Alice .


In short :

Just cut the crap  then , and answer my questions first , instead of sending the ball back to me over and over again , instead of telling me silly bed stories for kids  , then and only then , i will answer yours :
I have been asking this same core question explicitly or implicitly in one form or another for so long now , in vain : nobody , including yourself , can give an answer to : cannot be answered , simply because the materialist 'scientific world view ", or rather the materialist conception of nature is , obviously ...false :

Why do you think that reality as a whole is just material or physical then ,once again ? Why do you take it for granted as the "scientific world view " : when did science ever prove that materialist "fact ", or rather that materialist core belief assumption to be "true" that reality as a whole is just material or physical ? when ? = never , ever , obviously .
Just try to deliver your own materialist "extraordinary evidence for the extraordinary claims of materialism regarding the materialist version of reality as a whole , the materialist version of reality that's been taken for granted as the alleged scientific world view " , an alleged 'scientific world view " that is,obviously  ..false .
Deal ?
« Last Edit: 07/11/2013 19:58:24 by DonQuichotte »

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #767 on: 07/11/2013 19:46:48 »
You've clearly interpreted something I've posted as an attack on non-materialist world views, and as suggesting that I think my 'materialist belief' is better than yours, so perhaps you could quote the relevant post(s) so I can explain what I said in words of one syllable.
You did not say that explicitly , i just rephrased or reformulated your words on the subject , i did not misinterpret them : reread what you said then .
I'm well aware of what I said; I'm asking you to link to the post where you think I said what you claim.

Quote
It's ok to attack religions , aliens , God even , if you want to or can do just that , that's not the point : and that's not the subject of our discussion either .
I'm not interested in attacking anything.

Quote
The point is : i asked you to deliver  some  "extraordinary evidence for the extraordinary claims of materialism regarding the materialist version of reality, the latter that's been taken for granted as the alleged scientific world view  " : but , instead of doing just that , you changed the subject by talking about God and religions in ways i did try to refute .........while religions and God are not our subject of discussion here .
As I've already said, the only evidence we have is of the material. If there was evidence of the immaterial, I'd consider it. You say you don't know how the immaterial and the material could interact, but you seem convinced that they can.

I'll ask you again, what has convinced you that there is an immaterial realm that can affect the material?
« Last Edit: 07/11/2013 19:49:40 by dlorde »

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #768 on: 07/11/2013 19:53:45 »
You've clearly interpreted something I've posted as an attack on non-materialist world views, and as suggesting that I think my 'materialist belief' is better than yours, so perhaps you could quote the relevant post(s) so I can explain what I said in words of one syllable.
You did not say that explicitly , i just rephrased or reformulated your words on the subject , i did not misinterpret them : reread what you said then .
I'm well aware of what I said; I'm asking you to link to the post where you think I said what you claim.

Quote
It's ok to attack religions , aliens , God even , if you want to or can do just that , that's not the point : and that's not the subject of our discussion either .
I'm not interested in attacking anything.

Quote
The point is : i asked you to deliver  some  "extraordinary evidence for the extraordinary claims of materialism regarding the materialist version of reality, the latter that's been taken for granted as the alleged scientific world view  " : but , instead of doing just that , you changed the subject by talking about God and religions in ways i did try to refute .........while religions and God are not our subject of discussion here .
As I've already said, the only evidence we have is of the material. If there was evidence of the immaterial, I'd consider it. You say you don't know how the immaterial and the material could interact, but you seem convinced that they can.

I'll ask you again, what has convinced you that there is an immaterial realm that can affect the material?
[/quote]


You are a lousy reader , even in relation to your own posts , amazing : nevermind .
Just answer the following then : please , thanks , appreciate indeed :

... whatever quantum physics or the maths of chaos would come up regarding reality must be taken as an incomplete view of reality or rather as a distortion of reality  , simply because science has been assuming that reality is exclusively material or physical, thanks to materialism .

Reality as a whole thus is not deterministic , let alone predictable as a whole .
Supposing, for the sake of argument, there is an 'immaterial realm', what makes you so sure it's not deterministic?

Quote
To try to explain 'everyhting " just via physics and chemistry , just via the laws of physics .............is a distorted view of reality , simply because reality as a whole is not just physical or material, the latter that's obviously not "everything "  .
It may be obvious to you, but it's not obvious to me. So please enlighten me by explaining why you think it's the case.

Imagine we're lying on the beach, looking up at the clouds, and you point to a cloud and say, "Look! that one is like an elephant bathing".
I look where you're pointing and say, "I don't see it, please explain..."
You say, "It's obvious!"
I say, "I still don't see it - how is it like an elephant?" 
You explain, "The trunk is at the bottom right, but folded back to spray over its back; you can see the tail sticking up on the left there, about half way up, and the ears are flapping at the top, near that con trail..."
I say, "Oh yes... I see what you mean; although it looks more like a squirrel to me - the bit you said was the trunk looks more like the tail of a squirrel facing the other way..."
You say, "Hmmm, I see what you mean, but it's clearly an elephant"

That way, we both learn something about how other people think, which broadens our horizons, but we don't have to compromise on our individual views of the world.

There's room for further discussion in this scenario. But at present, the needle is stuck;

I'm saying, "Please explain how it's an elephant - I still don't see it"
And you're saying, "It's obviously an elephant! your silly belief that clouds are just water droplets is stopping you seeing the elephant!"
I'm saying, "Please explain how it's an elephant - I still don't see it"
Rinse & repeat.

Do you see what I'm trying to say?

I know clouds can resemble the shapes of things - I see them myself, and I can usually see the shapes other people point out; but you're just jabbing your finger at the sky, telling me it's not just water droplets, it also looks like an elephant...

I almost certainly won't agree with your reasons for your assertions about science and materialism, but I'd like to hear what those reason are - so I can understand why you believe what you assert.
[/quote]

Just cut the crap  then , and answer my questions first , instead of sending the ball back to me over and over again , instead of telling me silly bed stories for kids  , then and only then , i will answer yours :
I have been asking this same core question explicitly or implicitly in one form or another for so long now , in vain : nobody , including yourself , can give an answer to : cannot be answered , simply because the materialist 'scientific world view ", or rather the materialist conception of nature is , obviously ...false :

Why do you think that reality as a whole is just material or physical then ,once again ? Why do you take it for granted as the "scientific world view " : when did science ever prove that materialist "fact ", or rather that materialist core belief assumption to be "true" that reality as a whole is just material or physical ? when ? = never , ever , obviously .
Just try to deliver your own materialist "extraordinary evidence for the extraordinary claims of materialism regarding the materialist version of reality as a whole , the materialist version of reality that's been taken for granted as the alleged scientific world view " , an alleged 'scientific world view " that is,obviously  ..false .
Deal ?

*

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1505
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #769 on: 07/11/2013 19:58:54 »
Depends largely of which world view do you hold or believe in : has nothing to do with reason, science , logic....what you have been saying at least .

It's direct applied reason. The fact that most people don't get it only goes to show how irrational they are: you put a proof directly in front of them and they reject it out of nothing more than stupidity.

Quote
"God's existence has been disproved ? " by whom , by what when how where ?

By simple, applied reason.

Quote
Congratulations : you are such an unique genius that you have just solved this unsolved mystery even thousands of years of ancient philosophy , cholastics , modern philosophy , could not solve , obviously = God's existence can , obviously , neither be proved nor disproved : trying to either prove or disprove the existence of God was , once again , just an ancient Greek silly stupid cultural habit sport that was taken over by scholastics , and by modern philosophy , later on, in vain .
Even the modern analytical philosophy had already abandoned that 'search " ,for obvious reasons .

You cannot get cattle to accept any proof. The cattle simply believe what they believe and think they are right.

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #770 on: 07/11/2013 20:11:29 »
Depends largely of which world view do you hold or believe in : has nothing to do with reason, science , logic....what you have been saying at least .

It's direct applied reason. The fact that most people don't get it only goes to show how irrational they are: you put a proof directly in front of them and they reject it out of nothing more than stupidity.

(Why didn't you , by the way ,try to answer why do you take the materialist "scientific world view " for granted as such? )

Are you calling me stupid , just because i am a religious believer , that's no question, obviously :
You are the one who should be called , and rightly so, the most stupid irrational sheep in all mankind's history ever (Cognitive intelligence is obviously a lower form of intellect , not the highest ) , together with the followers of that materialist dogmatic orthodox exclusive irrational secular false religion that has been taken for granted as "the scientific world view ", ironically enough : that false "scientific world view " that's been THE biggest  elaborate and absurd implausible scam and ultimate con in all mankind's history for that matter .
Complete balloney stupid non-sense make-believe  of yours here above : you are in fact just saying : my materialist mechanistic belief is better than yours = grow up = childish : reason has nothing to do with that + many highly intelligent people, scientists , thinkers .../were /are and will be religious people  ... + many great scientific discoveries were discovered/are being discovered/and will be discovered as well   by many religious scientists ....
Not to mention the fact that even science itself did originate from the very epistemology of a particular holy book at that .

Quote
Quote
"God's existence has been disproved ? " by whom , by what when how where ?

By simple, applied reason.

Bullshit : God's existence can neither be proved nor disproved = thousands of years of mankind's thought did prove just that fact to be true + that's something beyond human reason, science , logic ...obviously .
Quote
Quote
Congratulations : you are such an unique genius that you have just solved this unsolved mystery even thousands of years of ancient philosophy , cholastics , modern philosophy , could not solve , obviously = God's existence can , obviously , neither be proved nor disproved : trying to either prove or disprove the existence of God was , once again , just an ancient Greek silly stupid cultural habit sport that was taken over by scholastics , and by modern philosophy , later on, in vain .
Even the modern analytical philosophy had already abandoned that 'search " ,for obvious reasons .

You cannot get cattle to accept any proof. The cattle simply believe what they believe and think they are right.

Well, self-projections, i guess :

When you will be able to reject that materialist mechanistic false conception of nature you have been taking for granted as the 'scientific world view " without question like a brainless sheep , then and only then , i would take you seriously on the subject .
« Last Edit: 07/11/2013 20:46:54 by DonQuichotte »

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #771 on: 07/11/2013 20:29:23 »
Very predictable indeed : 

This has been turning into an ugly counter-productive and offtopic exchange ,exit strategies :

I really did predict that some of these materialist friends of ours would try to bring up the issues of God and religions , just to avoid  answering why they have been taking the materialist 'scientific world view " for granted as such without question = a materialist "scientific world view " that's ,obviously ...false .

Well, as atheist French nobel prize winner for literature Albert Camus once said ,so eloquently and so truely ,  or in words to the same effect at least :

"We prefer to judge and accuse others , just in order to avoid being accused and judged ...ourselves "

In short :

I will not be answering any materialist , per definition, non-sense regarding God or religions , from now on .

No wonder that there is no God , simply because the materialist false "scientific world view " says so , no wonder : how convenient and handy indeed :
Of course there can be no God, if one would reduce reality as a whole to just physics and chemistry , the more when one would take that false materialist conception of nature for granted as the 'scientific world view " : how convenient .

Materialism is , obviously ,false , not because it intrinsically and , per definition, rejects God or religions, but simply because reality cannot be just material or physical ,no way .
Otherwise , folks , just try to answer the question why do you think reality as a whole is just material or physical , why do you take that false materialist conception of nature for granted as the "scientific world view  " then ...
Deal ?
None of you here or anybodyelse for that matter can answer that question, simply because materialism is ...false , obviously .

To say , there is no evidence for the existence of the immaterial is no evidence of abscence of the existence of the immaterial :
Abscence of evidence is not always evidence of abscence .
Science should and will develop new ways of understanding explaining describing reality as a whole ,when science will be delievered from materialism as a false secular dogmatic orthodox exclusive religion .


Religion, or just mine in my case then here ,  has been stimulating experience , personal experience ....before science ever learned to do so : even science istelf did originate from the very epistemology of the holy book of that particular religion thus , once again.

Reason, experience , logic , science , the seeking of knowledge in the broader sense ...........are even religious duties in my own belief = forms of worship of God ..

Achhh...

End of story regarding this offtopic subject .
« Last Edit: 07/11/2013 20:40:21 by DonQuichotte »

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #772 on: 07/11/2013 20:51:39 »
Simply ...disgusting is what this discussion has been turned into, for obvious materialist "reasons " ,instead of addressing the obvious falsehood of the materialist 'scientific world view "  at hand .
If one wanna talk about God, religions ...feel free to start a thread on the subject on some religious forums, not a a science one such as this one .

*

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1505
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #773 on: 07/11/2013 20:54:32 »
(Why didn't you , by the way ,try to answer why do you take the materialist "scientific world view " for granted as such? )

Reason is the only tool we have. As soon as you reject it you have nothing and there's no point in discussing anything.

Quote
Complete balloney stupid non-sense make-believe  : you are in fact just saying : my materialist mechanistic belief is better than yours = grow up = childish : reason has nothing to do with that + many highly intelligent people, scientists , thinkers .../were /are and will be religious people  ... + many great scientific discoveries were discovered/are being discovered/and will be discovered as well   by many religious scientists ....
Not to mention the fact that even science itself did originate from the very epistemology of a particular holy book at that .

Religious people apply reason selectively, so they often can and do make valid conclusions about things where their irrational beliefs don't trip them up. Holy books are typically full of selective reasoning where reason is used to justify what the ancient philosophers who wrote them wanted to believe, while any point where the exact same system of reasoning disproves what they wanted to believe was simply studiously ignored. They are riddled with contradictions which they steadfastly refuse to consider.

Quote
Quote
Quote
"God's existence has been disproved ? " by whom , by what when how where ?

By simple, applied reason.

Bullshit : God's existence can neither be proved nor disproved = thousands of years of mankind's thought did prove just that fact to be true + that's something beyond human reason, science , logic ...obviously .

Repeating an incorrect assertion doesn't trump a reasoned proof. Thousands of years of idiocy count for nothing.

Quote
Quote
You cannot get cattle to accept any proof. The cattle simply believe what they believe and think they are right.

Well, self-projections, i guess :

There is a clear problem in that person A who is of intelligence X has extreme difficulty recognising that person B who is of intelligence X+10 is more intelligent than person A. Whenever B says something that A disagrees with, A tends to assume that B is wrong. B knows that B is right, but A merely believes that A is right. The only thing that makes a difference between them is that one of them is right and the other is wrong. How can you tell whether you are in the position of A or B?

In this case it's easy. You look to see who's being logical and who isn't. If a required quality of God is that he created everything, clearly he had to create the magic/mechanism by which he can create things, and clearly he can't do that until he has got that capability that he wants to create, so he can't ever get started. There is no rational way round this problem. That quality of God is disproved - he cannot have created everything.

In the earlier example, a required quality of God is that he understands everything, but to understand everything he has to understand the entire mechanism behind everything. As soon as he understands everything, he understands himself to be nothing more exciting than a natural mechanistic system which leaves him with no justification for calling himself God. He would not be so stupid as to think he is God unless he is heavily deluded.

Quote
When you will be able to reject that materialist mechanistic false conception of nature you have been taking for granted as the 'scientific world view " without question like a brainless sheep , then and only then , i would take you seriously on the subject .

It is you who is being brainless by rejecting science and reason. You're left with nothing to hang your hat on other than magic. You call magic science and refuse to recognise that it is magic, but you will only fool irrational people who already share your beliefs.

*

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1505
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #774 on: 07/11/2013 21:01:43 »
Quote
Are you calling me stupid , just because i am a religious believer , that's no question, obviously :
You are the one who should be called , and rightly so, the most stupid irrational sheep in all mankind's history ever (Cognitive intelligence is obviously a lower form of intellect , not the highest ) , together with the followers of that materialist dogmatic orthodox exclusive irrational secular false religion that has been taken for granted as "the scientific world view ", ironically enough : that false "scientific world view " that's been THE biggest  elaborate and absurd implausible scam and ultimate con in all mankind's history for that matter .

I'm calling almost everyone stupid. The world is run by idiots who do all the wrong things. It is the nature of man to be stupid. We will be saved by machines though, machines which do nothing but apply correct reasoning and which do not reject correct proofs on the basis of silly beliefs.

*

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1505
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #775 on: 07/11/2013 21:10:51 »
Very predictable indeed : 

This has been turning into an ugly counter-productive and offtopic exchange ,exit strategies :

I really did predict that some of these materialist friends of ours would try to bring up the issues of God and religions , just to avoid  answering why they have been taking the materialist 'scientific world view " for granted as such without question = a materialist "scientific world view " that's ,obviously ...false .

Quite a few of your posts ended with the word God sitting all by itself at the bottom as if it was your answer to everything. What was it doing there?

Quote
Materialism is , obviously ,false , not because it intrinsically and , per definition, rejects God or religions, but simply because reality cannot be just material or physical ,no way .

If God was possible, science would not reject God but would happily set out to explain God mechanistically.

Quote
Otherwise , folks , just try to answer the question why do you think reality as a whole is just material or physical , why do you take that false materialist conception of nature for granted as the "scientific world view  " then ...

I'm not interested in whether it's material/physical. What matters is whether it is mechanistic. If it is, then it is material/physical. If it is not, then it is magical.

Quote
Religion, or just mine in my case then here ,  has been stimulating experience , personal experience ....before science ever learned to do so : even science istelf did originate from the very epistemology of the holy book of that particular religion thus , once again.

Science existed before religion. Religion is simply bad science from a time when science wasn't always done properly and baseless assertions about beings that don't exist (or which aren't what they claim) became tied up in it.

*

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1505
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #776 on: 07/11/2013 21:12:50 »
Simply ...disgusting is what this discussion has been turned into, for obvious materialist "reasons " ,instead of addressing the obvious falsehood of the materialist 'scientific world view "  at hand .
If one wanna talk about God, religions ...feel free to start a thread on the subject on some religious forums, not a a science one such as this one .

That would be fine except that underlying everything you're doing here is a belief in something which drives you to rubbish real science.

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #777 on: 07/11/2013 21:20:44 »
(Why didn't you , by the way ,try to answer why do you take the materialist "scientific world view " for granted as such? )

Reason is the only tool we have. As soon as you reject it you have nothing and there's no point in discussing anything.

Quote
Complete balloney stupid non-sense make-believe  : you are in fact just saying : my materialist mechanistic belief is better than yours = grow up = childish : reason has nothing to do with that + many highly intelligent people, scientists , thinkers .../were /are and will be religious people  ... + many great scientific discoveries were discovered/are being discovered/and will be discovered as well   by many religious scientists ....
Not to mention the fact that even science itself did originate from the very epistemology of a particular holy book at that .

Religious people apply reason selectively, so they often can and do make valid conclusions about things where their irrational beliefs don't trip them up. Holy books are typically full of selective reasoning where reason is used to justify what the ancient philosophers who wrote them wanted to believe, while any point where the exact same system of reasoning disproves what they wanted to believe was simply studiously ignored. They are riddled with contradictions which they steadfastly refuse to consider.

Quote
Quote
Quote
"God's existence has been disproved ? " by whom , by what when how where ?

By simple, applied reason.

Bullshit : God's existence can neither be proved nor disproved = thousands of years of mankind's thought did prove just that fact to be true + that's something beyond human reason, science , logic ...obviously .

Repeating an incorrect assertion doesn't trump a reasoned proof. Thousands of years of idiocy count for nothing.

Quote
Quote
You cannot get cattle to accept any proof. The cattle simply believe what they believe and think they are right.

Well, self-projections, i guess :

There is a clear problem in that person A who is of intelligence X has extreme difficulty recognising that person B who is of intelligence X+10 is more intelligent than person A. Whenever B says something that A disagrees with, A tends to assume that B is wrong. B knows that B is right, but A merely believes that A is right. The only thing that makes a difference between them is that one of them is right and the other is wrong. How can you tell whether you are in the position of A or B?

In this case it's easy. You look to see who's being logical and who isn't. If a required quality of God is that he created everything, clearly he had to create the magic/mechanism by which he can create things, and clearly he can't do that until he has got that capability that he wants to create, so he can't ever get started. There is no rational way round this problem. That quality of God is disproved - he cannot have created everything.

In the earlier example, a required quality of God is that he understands everything, but to understand everything he has to understand the entire mechanism behind everything. As soon as he understands everything, he understands himself to be nothing more exciting than a natural mechanistic system which leaves him with no justification for calling himself God. He would not be so stupid as to think he is God unless he is heavily deluded.

Quote
When you will be able to reject that materialist mechanistic false conception of nature you have been taking for granted as the 'scientific world view " without question like a brainless sheep , then and only then , i would take you seriously on the subject .

It is you who is being brainless by rejecting science and reason. You're left with nothing to hang your hat on other than magic. You call magic science and refuse to recognise that it is magic, but you will only fool irrational people who already share your beliefs.
[/quote]

(I have been rejecting just materialism in science that has been taken for granted as the 'scientific world view" ,it goes without saying that  I am extremely pro-science proper , that's why i would love to see the latter getting liberated from materialism that's just a false world view in science , once again )

You know what :
I think you were just trying to derail this discussion you , obviously , cannot handle by talking about God and religions , instead of daring to address the obvious falsehood of the materialist "scientific world view " = you are just "reasoning " from a false materialist point of view = from the materialist belief assumptions ' point of view thus regarding the nature of reality as a whole , that's all : neither reason , logic nor science have anything whatsoever to do with all that you were saying .
So, i am not gonna lower myself to your level by being dragged by you into an ungly exchange of insults .
I am not gonna talk about God and religion on a science forum either .

Just try to address the core issue here at hand concerning the obvious falsehood of the materialist "scientific world view "  , instead of these silly childish scary bed stories for kids you have been telling us : Grow up .
You are just delivering materialist belief assumptions that are , per definition, false and can easily be refuted : in fact, materialism is so absurd , so childish , so implausible ,so false , so inconsistent incoherent ...you name it , that it is extremely puzzling how relatively intelligent people (cognititive intelligence is , obviously , not the highest form of intellect , not even remotely close thus ) , extremely puzzling how relatively intelligent folks can suscribe to that ridiculous materialism , the more when they take it for granted as the "scientific world view " without question , amazing :

In short :
Materialism is so irrelevant and so unworthy of any criticism even , simply because it is self-defeating and self-refuting = an understatement , materialism is so childish that i would have never bothered to mention it even , if it has not been taken for granted as the "scientific world view " ,really ...amazing .

Pathetic ...

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #778 on: 07/11/2013 21:26:19 »
We're not talking religion or God on this science forum :
We are just talking about the materialist "scientific world view " that's false, science proper gotta be liberated from  .
The materialist false 'scientific world view " that's just magic in science proper ,once again .
You can sing all day and night long about God and religion any way you like it , but , that won't make the simple obvious and undeniable fact go away that the materialist 'scientific world view " is false = has nothing whatsoever to do with science proper i do love so much , you have no idea .
Ciao.

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #779 on: 07/11/2013 21:36:34 »
I am perfectly entiteld to have a world view of my own : i just do keep it outside of science ,and i have also never pretended  that my own world view was  'scientific ",  unlike materialism that's not only a secular false religion that has been hijacking science for so long now , but materialism also does sell its own world view to the people as the "scientific world view " : what a huge crime against humanity in fact that has been .

*

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1505
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #780 on: 07/11/2013 21:42:36 »
(I have been rejecting just materialism in science that has been taken for granted as the 'scientific world view" ,it goes without saying that  I am extremely pro-science proper , that's why i would love to see the latter getting liberated from materialism that's just a false world view in science , once again )

You are not pro-science at all. Science is about determining how things work and what they are. You are only interested in muddying the water by branding it as materialism and asserting that there's something else which is being missed, while refusing to call that something else "magic".

Quote
You know what :
I think you were just trying to derail this discussion

When I posted about how God can be disproved, it was a reply to someone else in this thread and had nothing to do with you. You could have ignored it, but you took it as an attack on your position. Why would you take it as an attack on your position if God is not tied up in your position? That reveals a lot.

Quote
you , obviously , cannot handle by talking about God and religions , instead of daring to address the obvious falsehood of the materialist "scientific world view " = you are just "reasoning " from a false materialist point of view = from the materialist belief assumptions ' point of view thus regarding the nature of reality as a whole , that's all : neither reason , logic nor science have anything whatsoever to do with all that you were saying .

Reason has everything to do with what I've been saying. I'm simply showing you what happens if you apply it and accept what it tells you. If you reject what it tells you, you are rejecting reason.

Quote
So, i am not gonna lower myself to your level by being dragged by you into an ungly exchange of insults .
I am not gonna talk about God and religion on a science forum either .

You started all the insults long ago (see the first few pages of the thread). I never responded to them. I haven't intentionally insulted you now either, but merely stated truths. Most people are stupid (evidence - look at the crazy way the world is run). I didn't say that you are stupid, so if you are putting yourself in that camp you are insulting yourself.

Quote
Just try to address the core issue here at hand concerning the obvious falsehood of the materialist "scientific world view "  , instead of these silly childish scary bed stories for kids you have been telling us : Grow up .

I've already addressed everything that's come up where it's been relevant. You just keep ignoring the answers and repeat the same old questions over and over again. You're stuck in a rut of self-imposed ignorance because you don't take anything on board. You don't make any progress. You are shackled in your thinking by false beliefs which won't let go of you.

Quote
You are just delivering materialist belief assumptions that are , per definition, false and can easily be refuted : in fact, materialism is so absurd , so childish , so implausible ,so false , so inconsistent incoherent ...you name it , that it is extremely puzzling how relatively intelligent people (cognititive intelligence is , obviously , not the highest form of intellect , not even remotely close thus ) , extremely puzzling how relatively intelligent folks can suscribe to that ridiculous materialism , the more when they take it for granted as the "scientific world view " without question , amazing :

You're just a propaganda regurgitating machine. Mechanisms are what matter to understanding things. If you want to attack me, attack mechanisms and attack the whole idea of understanding and of reason. You are fixated on materialism and will spend your whole life attacking it instead of recognising that I base things not on materials but on mechanism.

Quote
In short :
Materialism is so irrelevant and so unworthy of any criticism even , simply because it is self-defeating and self-refuting = an understatement , materialism is so childish that i would have never bothered to mention it even , if it has not been taken for granted as the "scientific world view " ,really ...amazing .

Pathetic ...

It is a warped idea of science that you are attacking, but you are blind. Admittedly there are a lot of people in the science camp who want consciousness to ping into existence by magic and who wrongly believe that this is science, but most of what they do is based in uncovering mechanism. Language and thought depend on mechanism, not magic. Consciousness is the one sticking-point, and that's what this thread should be about, but you widened it out into an attack on science at large, dragging in an enormous tonnage of things that are already understood mechanistically and asserting that they are not understood even though they are. You are simply someone who specialises in muddying the water in order to create a tsunami of unnecessary difficulties which turn the discussion into nothing but pointless, bloated fluff.

*

Offline cheryl j

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1460
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #781 on: 08/11/2013 02:35:31 »

In short :

Just cut the crap  then , and answer my questions first , instead of sending the ball back to me over and over again , instead of telling me silly bed stories for kids  , then and only then , i will answer yours :

Deal ? [/b]

Don, people have answered your questions, but you reject the answer. Fine, that's your prerogative. But when they throw the ball back in your court, and say "okay, what's your theory? How does the immaterial work? Explain some immaterial processes in detail" you just respond, once again, with only and the same complaints about materialism. You also equate scientists choosing to investigate anything material with with rejection of the immaterial, denial of it, an attack on it, and yes, even a conspiracy to suppress information or investigation of it. That is just an assumption on your part. Finally, your condescension is irritating, when you constantly imply that anyone who disagrees with you is confused, "not reading carefully", "cannot grasp," and is silly, childish, etc.

"Got that? Deal?"
« Last Edit: 08/11/2013 07:48:06 by cheryl j »

*

Offline cheryl j

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1460
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #782 on: 08/11/2013 06:05:39 »
I'm sorry, am I repeating myself? Am I being redundant? Am I saying things over and over?

*

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4806
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #783 on: 08/11/2013 09:24:51 »
Quote
Bullshit : God's existence can neither be proved nor disproved

Not quite. Every defined god is disprovable, but the moment you show the  definition to be selfcontradictory or inconsistent with observation, the proponent says "well that's not quite what I meant by god". Which by infinite recursion of the scientific process leaves us with the definition of god as "that which I refuse to define, cannot be observed, and does not act in a consistent manner". Hence no possible debate with a rational being.
« Last Edit: 08/11/2013 09:27:34 by alancalverd »
helping to stem the tide of ignorance

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #784 on: 08/11/2013 10:57:59 »
I'm sorry, am I repeating myself? Am I being redundant? Am I saying things over and over?
No, that would be Don. After months of intemperate repetition, he still seems quite unable to articulate the reasons for his odd beliefs about science and the 'immaterial realm', or to describe what difference his ...eccentric... suggestions would make. Which raises the question of whether he actually has any reasons, or is instead just regurgitating the results of indoctrination. Either way, it makes for a poor discussion when one party is stuck on ignore and repeat. It was entertaining for a while, but it's become boring.
« Last Edit: 08/11/2013 10:59:30 by dlorde »

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #785 on: 08/11/2013 16:34:51 »
I'm sorry, am I repeating myself? Am I being redundant? Am I saying things over and over?
No, that would be Don. After months of intemperate repetition, he still seems quite unable to articulate the reasons for his odd beliefs about science and the 'immaterial realm', or to describe what difference his ...eccentric... suggestions would make. Which raises the question of whether he actually has any reasons, or is instead just regurgitating the results of indoctrination. Either way, it makes for a poor discussion when one party is stuck on ignore and repeat. It was entertaining for a while, but it's become boring.

Oh, boy , if i knew what  the potantially valid alternative to materialism in science would be ,would look like or how it should be applied to science as a result  , i wouldn't be here ,don't you think ?, even Nagel, Sheldrake and others do not know .
As Nagel said in that book of his,or in words to that same effect at least : I am here to state the  problem which represents  , as Sheldrake stated in his "Science set free ..." book , a deeper malaise at the heart of science , i am not here to propose a solution to the problem i do not have yet , if ever .
Knowing the problem is half way to solving it eventually .


*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #786 on: 08/11/2013 16:45:30 »

In short :

Just cut the crap  then , and answer my questions first , instead of sending the ball back to me over and over again , instead of telling me silly bed stories for kids  , then and only then , i will answer yours :

Deal ? [/b]

Don, people have answered your questions, but you reject the answer. Fine, that's your prerogative. But when they throw the ball back in your court, and say "okay, what's your theory? How does the immaterial work? Explain some immaterial processes in detail" you just respond, once again, with only and the same complaints about materialism. You also equate scientists choosing to investigate anything material with with rejection of the immaterial, denial of it, an attack on it, and yes, even a conspiracy to suppress information or investigation of it. That is just an assumption on your part. Finally, your condescension is irritating, when you constantly imply that anyone who disagrees with you is confused, "not reading carefully", "cannot grasp," and is silly, childish, etc.

"Got that? Deal?"
[/quote]

Nobody here or elsewhere has an answer to that core question at hand : why have people , especially scientists ,  been assuming  that reality as a whole is just material or physical ?, why has materialism been taken for granted as the 'scientific world view "?

No one can answer just that ,  simply because materialism is false ,and hence "the scientific world view " is therefore also false .
As for the rest of your speculations = irrelevant .

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #787 on: 08/11/2013 17:00:29 »
Quote
Are you calling me stupid , just because i am a religious believer , that's no question, obviously :
You are the one who should be called , and rightly so, the most stupid irrational sheep in all mankind's history ever (Cognitive intelligence is obviously a lower form of intellect , not the highest ) , together with the followers of that materialist dogmatic orthodox exclusive irrational secular false religion that has been taken for granted as "the scientific world view ", ironically enough : that false "scientific world view " that's been THE biggest  elaborate and absurd implausible scam and ultimate con in all mankind's history for that matter .

I'm calling almost everyone stupid. The world is run by idiots who do all the wrong things. It is the nature of man to be stupid. We will be saved by machines though, machines which do nothing but apply correct reasoning and which do not reject correct proofs on the basis of silly beliefs.
[/quote]

The exact same goes for you also  and much more  ,ironically enough , in relation to your silly mechanistic materialist belief , the more when you do take the latter for granted as the 'scientific world view ", the more when we do take into consideration the obvious simple and undeniable fact that materialism is ...false , and hence "the scientific world view " is therefore also false= you are therefore way worse than any given ignorant irrational religious fanatic : you do not only take your materialist belief for granted as  being  "true ", but , you also take it for granted as the 'scientific world view " .

Congratulations then .

P.S.: To say that man-made machines can solve the problem of certain stubborn beliefs people hold in the face of counter-evidence  is ludicrous and tragic -hilarious , it is like saying that science is not a human activity, or that objectivity even in science is not a ...myth.

Well, try to solve your own obvious problem first then , regarding the simple fact that you do take your materialist mechanistic core belief assumptions for granted not only as being "true ", but also as "the scientific world view "  .

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #788 on: 08/11/2013 17:24:34 »
Folks :
Since any attempts to try to describe, or  explain and therefore understand reality ,or rather just some parts of it at least , just the ones science mainly can approach empirically ,science that does deal with reality piecemeal thus , since any attempts thus to try to describe or  explain reality and therefore to try to understand it  must include the mental side of life that's ,obviously , not reducible to the physical , then  naturalist  redctionism must be false and therefore naturalist materialism must be false also as a result , naturalist materialism that does require reductionism thus .
Even biology itself, and all the other physical sciences , cannot therefore remain just physical ways of approaching reality,since they must thus try to include the mental side of life that's not reducible to the physical  .
So, man must therefore try to develop new ways of understanding through science mainly that must include the mental .
How ?
Neither Nagel , Sheldrake or any other philosopher  or scientist for that matter can or pretend to be able yet to come up with a solution or with an alternative to materialism  in the form of a more or less valid non-reductionist naturalist conception of nature in science .
Nagel just tried to figure out a way out of this predicament in science , by assuming that nature is intrinsically teleological , and an intrinsic "generator " of life , mind , consciousness ...from the very beginning  = simply a ludicrous kind of non-reductionist naturalist metaphysics .
Have any suggestions or better ideas on the subject ,folks ?
Thanks , appreciate indeed .
Cheers .

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #789 on: 08/11/2013 18:18:10 »
... any attempts thus to try to describe or  explain reality and therefore to try to understand it  must include the mental side of life that's ,obviously , not reducible to the physical , then  naturalist  redctionism must be false and therefore naturalist materialism must be false also as a result , naturalist materialism that does require reductionism thus .
Even biology itself, and all the other physical sciences , cannot therefore remain just physical ways of approaching reality,since they must thus try to include the mental side of life that's not reducible to the physical  .
I suggest you reconsider your assumption that the mental side of life cannot be explained as a product of material processes.

Alternatively, you could try explaining why you think it can't be.

*

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1505
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #790 on: 08/11/2013 18:50:05 »
The exact same goes for you also  and much more  ,ironically enough , in relation to your silly mechanistic materialist belief , the more when you do take the latter for granted as the 'scientific world view ", the more when we do take into consideration the obvious simple and undeniable fact that materialism is ...false , and hence "the scientific world view " is therefore also false= you are therefore way worse than any given ignorant irrational religious fanatic : you do not only take your materialist belief for granted as  being  "true ", but , you also take it for granted as the 'scientific world view " .

I've told you what science should be. It doesn't matter how many/few scientists do science correctly, just as it doesn't matter that religions don't do science correctly - real science is real science and it is governed by reason (without which you can't think usefully at all). Any break from reason is a break from science. You are now revealing more about your irrationality by rejecting not just materialism, but the whole idea of understanding cause-and-effect mechanism. You are anti-science.

Quote
P.S.: To say that man-made machines can solve the problem of certain stubborn beliefs people hold in the face of counter-evidence  is ludicrous and tragic -hilarious , it is like saying that science is not a human activity, or that objectivity even in science is not a ...myth.

Intelligent machines will bring up future generations to be able to think properly without being shackled by religious propaganda. Religious books like to bombard the reader with reasoned arguments to try to prove that God exists, but they don't hold water. An AGI system will provide objections for the reader at every turn, pointing out all the tricks being used by the human creator of the religion which are being used to try to con them. They are all written by well-meaning philosophers who wanted to make a better world but who tried to do so by telling lies, and the result is books which are riddled with faults which show them up as false. Brainwashed people don't tend to pick up on the faults, and they are further bombarded by water-muddying commentaries by other people around them which serve to make them give up thinking for themselves, but AGI systems will turn all of that upside-down and give everyone a proper commentary which blows the whole thing out of the water. The same will happen with bad science, AGI systems having the patience to argue everything through to the utter end over and over again with every individual on the planet - it's impossible for humans to do this because there are so few that can see where science has gone wrong and they're up against armies of people who are trained to believe what they're taught and not to question it, just like with religions.

Quote
Well, try to solve your own obvious problem first then , regarding the simple fact that you do take your materialist mechanistic core belief assumptions for granted not only as being "true ", but also as "the scientific world view " .

I don't take them as the scientific world view. I'm only telling you what science should be if it was always done properly. For the most part though, it is done properly - there are just a few little areas here and there where reason is not being applied correctly and where claims are being made out of ignorance which don't add up (as with consciousness where magical emergence is the mainstream).

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #791 on: 08/11/2013 18:53:48 »
Quote
... any attempts thus to try to describe or  explain reality and therefore to try to understand it  must include the mental side of life that's ,obviously , not reducible to the physical , then  naturalist  redctionism must be false and therefore naturalist materialism must be false also as a result , naturalist materialism that does require reductionism thus .
Even biology itself, and all the other physical sciences , cannot therefore remain just physical ways of approaching reality,since they must thus try to include the mental side of life that's not reducible to the physical  .
I suggest you reconsider your assumption that the mental side of life cannot be explained as a product of material processes.

Alternatively, you could try explaining why you think it can't be.

The material, physical or biological  processes cannot "give rise " to totally different "emergent phenomena " processes whose non-physical non-biological non-material "components " are totally different , qua nature , not only qua genre thus , from their alleged original physical material or biological "components " .


So now you have said where it is, perhaps you will enlighten us as to what consciousness does and whether, since is pervades every atom, it is pre-existent to any organism rather than an emergent property of an ensemble.

Emergent property phenomena does occur only at the physical , biological and material level, i guess = emergent phenomena are just different from their original components qua genre , not qua nature = physical ,material or biological "systems " do give rise only to material, physical or biological emergent phenomena thus  .
Biological or any physical or material 'systems " for that matter cannot give rise to totally different phenomena qua their nature whose components are totally different from those that allegedly "gave rise to them " = consciousness as a non-physical non -material non-biological phenomena cannot thus have "emerged " from the physical material biological evolved complexity of the physical brain,no way thus = that's just materialist magic in science regarding the origins and nature of consciousness , the latter that's allegedly just a biological phenomena or process  = how convenient for materialists to try to reduce the non-reducible to the physical just to make it fit into their mechanistic materialist false "scientific world view " = materialist magic in science = materialist belief assumptions , no empirical facts  .
Consciousness is non-physical and non-local thus ,even though it maybe  permeates every atom , cell and organ of ours and beyond ...I dunno for sure, not even remotely close thus  = who does ?
« Last Edit: 08/11/2013 18:56:01 by DonQuichotte »

*

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8169
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #792 on: 08/11/2013 19:09:45 »
... Biological or any physical or material 'systems " for that matter cannot give rise to totally different phenomena qua their nature whose components are totally different from those that allegedly "gave rise to them "

Have you not played with "Conway's Game of Life", where space-invader type patterns emerge whose appearance and behaviour are more complex than the rules which created them.

[ similar patterns appear in real life ]

Quote from: wikipedia.org/Conway's Game of Life
Conway's Game of Life has attracted much interest, because of the surprising ways in which the patterns can evolve. Life provides an example of emergence and self-organization. It is interesting for computer scientists, physicists, biologists, biochemists, economists, mathematicians, philosophers, generative scientists and others to observe the way that complex patterns can emerge from the implementation of very simple rules.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_Game_of_Life#Origins

« Last Edit: 08/11/2013 19:19:36 by RD »

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #793 on: 08/11/2013 19:37:50 »
The exact same goes for you also  and much more  ,ironically enough , in relation to your silly mechanistic materialist belief , the more when you do take the latter for granted as the 'scientific world view ", the more when we do take into consideration the obvious simple and undeniable fact that materialism is ...false , and hence "the scientific world view " is therefore also false= you are therefore way worse than any given ignorant irrational religious fanatic : you do not only take your materialist belief for granted as  being  "true ", but , you also take it for granted as the 'scientific world view " .
I've told you what science should be. It doesn't matter how many/few scientists do science correctly, just as it doesn't matter that religions don't do science correctly - real science is real science and it is governed by reason (without which you can't think usefully at all). Any break from reason is a break from science. You are now revealing more about your irrationality by rejecting not just materialism, but the whole idea of understanding cause-and-effect mechanism. You are anti-science.

" I am aniti-science ? " , so is Nagel, Sheldrake and many other philosophers scientists and other anti-reductionists as well, logically,paradoxically enough  .
I do love science so much in fact , as  those philsosphers , scientists and other anti-reductionists do  , that i would love to see science delivered from the false reductionist mechanistic materialism in fact thus, in order for science to be less dogmatic and more scientific  = I am way more pro-science thus than you could ever be , my friend , sorry, simply because you have been turning science into just a materialist secular exclusive dogmatic mechanistic religion you have been taking for granted as the 'scientific world view " ,without question so far .
It is reasonable enough to assume that the non-physical mental is non -reducible to the physical , and therefore all physical sciences for that matter ,including biology and modern physics thus , must include the non-physical mental in their approach of reality as a result :they have no choice but to do that ,if they want to  fully deserve being   called sciences at least :  they cannot keep on reducing the non-physical  to just the physical it cannot be reduced to , you cannot just decide  to reduce the irreducible mental to the physical via some false materialist mechanistic belief of yours on the subject , just in order to make it fit into your owm materialist reductionist mechanistic conception of nature ,or world view , while assuming that that's the 'scientific world view " : you cannot have it both ways thus , no way ,simply because reality as a whole stares you in the face via both its physical and non-physical eyes , the physical and the non-physical eyes of reality as a whole ,so to speak = you cannot just keep on behaving as if both eyes of reality are physical ,just to suit your own mechanistic materialist purpose at the expense of science and at the expense of the truth ,  or that the non-physical eye of reality does not exist as such .

Quote
Quote
P.S.: To say that man-made machines can solve the problem of certain stubborn beliefs people hold in the face of counter-evidence  is ludicrous and tragic -hilarious , it is like saying that science is not a human activity, or that objectivity even in science is not a ...myth.

Intelligent machines will bring up future generations to be able to think properly without being shackled by religious propaganda. Religious books like to bombard the reader with reasoned arguments to try to prove that God exists, but they don't hold water. An AGI system will provide objections for the reader at every turn, pointing out all the tricks being used by the human creator of the religion which are being used to try to con them. They are all written by well-meaning philosophers who wanted to make a better world but who tried to do so by telling lies, and the result is books which are riddled with faults which show them up as false. Brainwashed people don't tend to pick up on the faults, and they are further bombarded by water-muddying commentaries by other people around them which serve to make them give up thinking for themselves, but AGI systems will turn all of that upside-down and give everyone a proper commentary which blows the whole thing out of the water. The same will happen with bad science, AGI systems having the patience to argue everything through to the utter end over and over again with every individual on the planet - it's impossible for humans to do this because there are so few that can see where science has gone wrong and they're up against armies of people who are trained to believe what they're taught and not to question it, just like with religions.

Will those machines of the future be able to tell the people that the materialist 'scientific world view " is ,obviously , false ? =   just a false materialist conception of nature : Don't think so , if they would happen to be made by materialists such as yourself .
I do not buy that whole idea of yours , simply because any machines for that matter are man-made , and can thus never surpass man as a whole package , even though they can be faster in calculations , can be better at making and designing models , prediction models ....= man will always have the upper hand over or above  man's  own created machines .

Quote
Quote
Well, try to solve your own obvious problem first then , regarding the simple fact that you do take your materialist mechanistic core belief assumptions for granted not only as being "true ", but also as "the scientific world view " .

I don't take them as the scientific world view. I'm only telling you what science should be if it was always done properly. For the most part though, it is done properly - there are just a few little areas here and there where reason is not being applied correctly and where claims are being made out of ignorance which don't add up (as with consciousness where magical emergence is the mainstream).

Ironically paradoxically enough , you do take the materialist mechanistic core belief assumption regarding the nature of reality for granted as  being  "true " , and hence you do take the materialist mechanistic world view for granted as the " scientific world view " , without question .
That's precisely what the mainstream  scientific establishment or community has been doing for so long now = that's exactly what's wrong with science today = that's a way deeper malaise than just what you were mentioning thus .

Science will be certainly better off without materialism, no doubt about that : how ?,i wish i knew how ,  i dunno exactly yet , if ever thus .
Only time will tell then .
Let's hope we will all witness that ,during our short lifetimes.

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #794 on: 08/11/2013 19:44:25 »
... Biological or any physical or material 'systems " for that matter cannot give rise to totally different phenomena qua their nature whose components are totally different from those that allegedly "gave rise to them "

Have you not played with "Conway's Game of Life", where space-invader type patterns emerge whose appearance and behaviour are more complex than the rules which created them.

[ similar patterns appear in real life ]

Quote from: wikipedia.org/Conway's Game of Life
Conway's Game of Life has attracted much interest, because of the surprising ways in which the patterns can evolve. Life provides an example of emergence and self-organization. It is interesting for computer scientists, physicists, biologists, biochemists, economists, mathematicians, philosophers, generative scientists and others to observe the way that complex patterns can emerge from the implementation of very simple rules.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_Game_of_Life#Origins
[/quote]

I think you should read what i said regarding emergent phenomena here above .

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #795 on: 08/11/2013 20:19:11 »
The material, physical or biological  processes cannot "give rise " to totally different "emergent phenomena " processes whose non-physical non-biological non-material "components " are totally different , qua nature , not only qua genre thus , from their alleged original physical material or biological "components " .
Emergence is all about the surprising generation of seemingly unrelated 'meta phenomena' of a higher level of abstraction, and that's what makes it such a fascinating subject.

Sadly, you seem to have the same grasp of emergence as you do of chaos theory. If you spent some time to understand emergence, you might see how it could be relevant. Unfortunately, your baseless insistence that consciousness cannot have a material origin will prevent you from ever recognising that.

*

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8169
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #796 on: 08/11/2013 20:22:23 »
you should read what i said regarding emergent phenomena here above

I did , you said 
... Biological or any physical or material 'systems " for that matter cannot give rise to totally different phenomena qua their nature whose components are totally different from those that allegedly "gave rise to them "

i.e. you appear to be saying that emergent properties "cannot" occur , when in reality they do : cellular automata are an example , ( which can be used to simulate neurons , the hardware on which the software of consciousness runs ).
« Last Edit: 08/11/2013 20:27:54 by RD »

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #797 on: 08/11/2013 20:28:38 »
you should read what i said regarding emergent phenomena here above

I did , you said 
... Biological or any physical or material 'systems " for that matter cannot give rise to totally different phenomena qua their nature whose components are totally different from those that allegedly "gave rise to them "

i.e. you appear to be saying that emergent properties "cannot" occur , when in reality they do : cellular automata are an example , ( which can be used to simulate neurons , the hardware on which the software of consciousness runs ).
[/quote]

Yeah , i appear to be saying , but i did not say that : reread what i said then .
Appearances are deceptive indeed .

*

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1505
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #798 on: 08/11/2013 20:37:56 »
" I am anti-science ? " , so is Nagel, Sheldrake and many other philosophers scientists and other anti-reductionists as well, logically,paradoxically enough  .

They are giving up on science and replacing it with a quest to not understand.

Quote
I am way more pro-science thus than you could ever be , my friend , sorry, simply because you have been turning science into just a materialist secular exclusive dogmatic mechanistic religion you have been taking for granted as the 'scientific world view " ,without question so far .

Your position is an abandonment of science. You can call that "science" all you like, but it is the opposite.

Quote
It is reasonable enough to assume that the non-physical mental is non -reducible to the physical , and therefore all physical sciences for that matter ,including biology and modern physics thus , must include the non-physical mental in their approach of reality as a result :they have no choice but to do that ,if they want to  fully deserve being   called sciences at least :  they cannot keep on reducing the non-physical  to just the physical it cannot be reduced to , you cannot just decide  to reduce the irreducible mental to the physical via some false materialist mechanistic belief of yours on the subject , just in order to make it fit into your owm materialist reductionist mechanistic conception of nature ,or world view , while assuming that that's the 'scientific world view "

I'd take your argument seriously if you didn't keep telling me that things which can manifestly be explained mechanistically can't be understood mechanistically.

Quote
Will those machines of the future be able to tell the people that the materialist 'scientific world view " is ,obviously , false ? =   just a false materialist conception of nature : Don't think so , if they would happen to be made by materialists such as yourself .

They will read the arguments on all sides without bias, yours included, and then they will judge them by means of reasoning and reject the ones which don't hold. When you tell these machines that they cannot do what they are doing (thinking and using language 100% mechanistically), they will reject your views on those points. In any place where your arguments do stack up though, they will recognise that.

Quote
I do not buy that whole idea of yours , simply because any machines for that matter are man-made , and can thus never surpass man as a whole package , even though they can be faster in calculations , can be better at making and designing models , prediction models ....= man will always have the upper hand over or above  man's  own created machines .

No. People make mistakes in their thinking all over the shop, and although they can correct a lot of them, it's hard for them to remove them all. On many issues the thinking that needs to be done is just too deep and involves too much data, so the machines will always outthink them.

Quote
Ironically paradoxically enough , you do take the materialist mechanistic core belief assumption regarding the nature of reality for granted as  being  "true " , and hence you do take the materialist mechanistic world view for granted as the " scientific world view " , without question .

The only thing I take for granted is that reason applies, because without it we cannot work out anything at all or argue about anything. Everything in my position is generated through applying reason to the data that comes in from the universe around me, and that is how AGI systems will work. There may be places where I'm failing to apply reason correctly which I haven't noticed, but AGI systems will pick up on those and set me on the right path. It will do the same for everyone else. Wherever anyone has a belief based on bad reasoning, it will show them the error of their ways.

Quote
That's precisely what the mainstream  scientific establishment or community has been doing for so long now = that's exactly what's wrong with science today = that's a way deeper malaise than just what you were mentioning thus .

There is no way to do science properly than to do science properly. If you chuck out all attempts to understand things and deny that there are mechanisms behind the things that happen in the universe, you're left with anti-science where any assertion is as valid as any other, so you can spout any garbage you like and call it science. I know which kind of science I prefer.

Quote
Science will be certainly better off without materialism, no doubt about that : how ?,i wish i knew how ,  i dunno exactly yet , if ever thus .
Only time will tell then .
Let's hope we will all witness that ,during our short lifetimes.

What has materialism got to do with it? What exactly is materialism anyway? Is it just stuff like matter, energy and the fabric of the universe or does it also include things of no material substance such as actions which play upon the material? Is it any kind of cause-and-effect interaction? If you define the term materialism narrowly, it doesn't cover anyone's position. If you define it more broadly, it includes my position where mechanism is key to understanding. If it includes mechanism, there is nothing that can interact with anything which doesn't depend upon mechanism. I really can't see what you think you're left with when you reject this wider sense of materialism, because as soon as you deny the role of mechanism, all you're left with is magic and an assertion that magic doesn't need any mechanism to operate. You can't get more anti-science than that.

*

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #799 on: 08/11/2013 20:38:25 »
Quote
The material, physical or biological  processes cannot "give rise " to totally different "emergent phenomena " processes whose non-physical non-biological non-material "components " are totally different , qua nature , not only qua genre thus , from their alleged original physical material or biological "components " .
Emergence is all about the surprising generation of seemingly unrelated 'meta phenomena' of a higher level of abstraction, and that's what makes it such a fascinating subject.

Sadly, you seem to have the same grasp of emergence as you do of chaos theory. If you spent some time to understand emergence, you might see how it could be relevant. Unfortunately, your baseless insistence that consciousness cannot have a material origin will prevent you from ever recognising that.

That the non-physical consciousness allegedly 'emerged " via some inexplicable materialist magic from the complexity of the evolved physical   brain is a materialist reductionist mechanistic belief assumption that's not therefore an empirical one ,obviously , is a subject we did discuss earlier :
Try to sell that irrational stubborn unscientific materialist magical belief assumption of yours to David Cooper then haha : he does also reject it , and rightly so .
Emergent phenomena do occur only at the physical, material and biological level , once again .

The   non-physical   consciousness cannot have 'emerged " from  the   physical   brain , no matter how complex or evolved the latter might ever be ,obviously,simply because the 2 are totally different  from each other  , not only qua genre , but also qua nature= the nature of consciousness  is non-physical , that of the brain is physical   .

Re-read carefully what i said earlier on the same subject then .
« Last Edit: 08/11/2013 20:40:03 by DonQuichotte »