A Pragmatist's Guide to God
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-04-2017, 10:22 AM (This post was last modified: 15-04-2017 10:41 AM by GirlyMan.)
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 05:06 AM)julep Wrote:  
(14-04-2017 09:08 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Now he's just being fucking sappy though. I hate sappy.

He's a condescending sentimentalist.

Worse yet, I think I just got trolled. By the same fucking troll that keeps coming back. "Good sir", my big fat ass. So ashamed. So very ashamed. Blush

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
15-04-2017, 10:24 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 10:20 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(14-04-2017 09:38 PM)DLJ Wrote:  Step inside a computer ... show me the App.

Smartass

I can show it to you but then I'd have to kill you.

Fixt.

(God, I think I prefer *normal* theists. This condescending and ignorant word-onanism is in a league of its own when it comes to obnoxiousness)

"E se non passa la tristezza con altri occhi la guarderĂ²."
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Vera's post
15-04-2017, 10:26 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 10:16 AM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  
(14-04-2017 07:38 PM)Vera Wrote:  If I were a bear and I needed sheer idiocy to survive hibernation, this here would last me a good five or six winters, easy.

This is a real problem that science can't address. Philosophers and scientists wrestle with this question. Even Daniel Dennett has tried to take a stab in "Consciousness Explained". However, his book doesn't explain anything. If you like I can post my Symposium paper on the famous Mary Problem, a problem that plagues consciousness, so that you guys see one of the struggles.

So fucking what? All that proves is there's some hard questions. It neither dictates nor implies the need for a "higher power"

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.
Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like JesseB's post
15-04-2017, 10:28 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 10:20 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(14-04-2017 09:38 PM)DLJ Wrote:  Step inside a computer ... show me the App.

Smartass

I can show it to you but it'd make about as much sense as reality. Smile

I suppose we have to define consciousness now. Let me illustrate a version of the Turing test. Deep blue, a computer, played the grand master in chess, Gary Kasperov. It was a back and forth match. Gary won the first match. However, the second match Kasperov lost.

Now computers can think of thousands of chess moves a second, while gary can only think of... let's say a hundred a second just say. Let's be generous. So is intelligence mere computing power? If this is the case then we are outsmarted by the simplest of calculators. To take a step back, who is the one intelligent? Is it the ones that created the program, or the program itself? If we draw a map, is the map intelligent? To further illustrate the problem, does the computer know how to PLAY chess, or does it juts follow the rules inside the programs perimeters unconsciously? Does the computer know what it is like to play a game so much that it doesn't want it to ever end--like we never want life to end?

Where is the app for that? Hard ai has a long way to go...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2017, 10:30 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 10:26 AM)JesseB Wrote:  
(15-04-2017 10:16 AM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  This is a real problem that science can't address. Philosophers and scientists wrestle with this question. Even Daniel Dennett has tried to take a stab in "Consciousness Explained". However, his book doesn't explain anything. If you like I can post my Symposium paper on the famous Mary Problem, a problem that plagues consciousness, so that you guys see one of the struggles.

So fucking what? All that proves is there's some hard questions. It neither dictates nor implies the need for a "higher power"

It's like we're playing Cosmic Chutes and Ladders and no matter where he starts, the dice keep this one player landing, unfortunately, on the "leap to Gawd" space. Followed by a quick side-slide to "Of Course I Really Mean the Christian God" space.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like julep's post
15-04-2017, 10:33 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 10:28 AM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  
(15-04-2017 10:20 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  I can show it to you but it'd make about as much sense as reality. Smile

I suppose we have to define consciousness now. Let me illustrate a version of the Turing test. Deep blue, a computer, played the grand master in chess, Gary Kasperov. It was a back and forth match. Gary won the first match. However, the second match Kasperov lost.

Now computers can think of thousands of chess moves a second, while gary can only think of... let's say a hundred a second just say. Let's be generous. So is intelligence mere computing power? If this is the case then we are outsmarted by the simplest of calculators. To take a step back, who is the one intelligent? Is it the ones that created the program, or the program itself? If we draw a map, is the map intelligent? To further illustrate the problem, does the computer know how to PLAY chess, or does it juts follow the rules inside the programs perimeters unconsciously? Does the computer know what it is like to play a game so much that it doesn't want it to ever end--like we never want life to end?

Where is the app for that? Hard ai has a long way to go...

It is in development (It's called AI), it's more complicated than simply calculations per second, its also various algorithms, ability to analyze and make decisions, oh and self learning.

I mean there's a LOT of programmers here.... you might not wanna step in this turd, you'll just embarrass yourself.

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.
Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like JesseB's post
15-04-2017, 10:36 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 10:16 AM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  This is a real problem that science can't address. Philosophers and scientists wrestle with this question. Even Daniel Dennett has tried to take a stab in "Consciousness Explained". However, his book doesn't explain anything. If you like I can post my Symposium paper on the famous Mary Problem, a problem that plagues consciousness, so that you guys see one of the struggles.

I fail to see the problem.

I am my body. I perceive the world through my body, which gives those experiences subjective qualities. Because of those subjective qualities, I may conflate my consciousness with my self. However, consciousness isn't a self at all, but a process of perceiving the world, including a self in the world. In other words, some people confuse their self-concept with their real self.

So once you no longer define consciousness as the self, the "problem of consciousness" seems to disappear, at least to me. You may as well ask "Why am I me?" if you don't understand why conscious experiences are subjective.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Thoreauvian's post
15-04-2017, 10:37 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 10:33 AM)JesseB Wrote:  
(15-04-2017 10:28 AM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  I suppose we have to define consciousness now. Let me illustrate a version of the Turing test. Deep blue, a computer, played the grand master in chess, Gary Kasperov. It was a back and forth match. Gary won the first match. However, the second match Kasperov lost.

Now computers can think of thousands of chess moves a second, while gary can only think of... let's say a hundred a second just say. Let's be generous. So is intelligence mere computing power? If this is the case then we are outsmarted by the simplest of calculators. To take a step back, who is the one intelligent? Is it the ones that created the program, or the program itself? If we draw a map, is the map intelligent? To further illustrate the problem, does the computer know how to PLAY chess, or does it juts follow the rules inside the programs perimeters unconsciously? Does the computer know what it is like to play a game so much that it doesn't want it to ever end--like we never want life to end?

Where is the app for that? Hard ai has a long way to go...

It is in development (It's called AI), it's more complicated than simply calculations per second, its also various algorithms, ability to analyze and make decisions, oh and self learning.

I mean there's a LOT of programmers here.... you might not wanna step in this turd, you'll just embarrass yourself.
Argument from other's authorities? That's weak. Give me an argument with protein.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2017, 10:38 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 10:36 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  
(15-04-2017 10:16 AM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  This is a real problem that science can't address. Philosophers and scientists wrestle with this question. Even Daniel Dennett has tried to take a stab in "Consciousness Explained". However, his book doesn't explain anything. If you like I can post my Symposium paper on the famous Mary Problem, a problem that plagues consciousness, so that you guys see one of the struggles.

I fail to see the problem.

I am my body. I perceive the world through my body, which gives those experiences subjective qualities. Because of those subjective qualities, I may conflate my consciousness with my self. However, consciousness isn't a self at all, but a process of perceiving the world, including a self in the world. In other words, some people confuse their self-concept with their real self.

So once you no longer define consciousness as the self, the "problem of consciousness" seems to disappear, at least to me. You may as well ask "Why am I me?" if you don't understand why conscious experiences are subjective.

I'm still half asleep, but I'd just like to point out. I like you dude. Some really good stuff goin on in that brain case.

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.
Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes JesseB's post
15-04-2017, 10:39 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 10:36 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  
(15-04-2017 10:16 AM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  This is a real problem that science can't address. Philosophers and scientists wrestle with this question. Even Daniel Dennett has tried to take a stab in "Consciousness Explained". However, his book doesn't explain anything. If you like I can post my Symposium paper on the famous Mary Problem, a problem that plagues consciousness, so that you guys see one of the struggles.

I fail to see the problem.

I am my body. I perceive the world through my body, which gives those experiences subjective qualities. Because of those subjective qualities, I may conflate my consciousness with my self. However, consciousness isn't a self at all, but a process of perceiving the world, including a self in the world. In other words, some people confuse their self-concept with their real self.

So once you no longer define consciousness as the self, the "problem of consciousness" seems to disappear, at least to me. You may as well ask "Why am I me?" if you don't understand why conscious experiences are subjective.
There is no self? But what is that active, organizing, creating element that knits experience together and makes judgments on how to act or react? Huh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: