A sentient god? I don't think so.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-11-2012, 10:47 AM
A sentient god? I don't think so.
Hypothesis (from WLC): God is an immaterial, timeless, eternal and sentient being.

P - Premise | C - Conclusion
P1: God (hypothesis) is sentient.
P2: Sentience requires a brain.
P3: Brains are material.
C1: Therefore god has no brain.
C2: Therefore god (hypothesis) is not sentient.

Q.E.D.? Consider

Special pleading in 3... 2... 1...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2012, 10:50 AM
RE: A sentient god? I don't think so.
P2 is not substantiated.

I wouldn't use this argument.

E 2 = (mc 2)2 + (pc )2
614C → 714N + e + ̅νe
2 K(s) + 2 H2O(l) → 2 KOH(aq) + H2 (g) + 196 kJ/mol
It works, bitches.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Phaedrus's post
22-11-2012, 10:51 AM (This post was last modified: 22-11-2012 12:46 PM by Vosur.)
RE: A sentient god? I don't think so.
(22-11-2012 10:50 AM)Phaedrus Wrote:  P2 is not substantiated.

I wouldn't use this argument.
Yes, yes it is. We have proven it repeatedly through experimentation and observation. (ex. Anencephaly)

That aside, I consider arguing about the properties of a being whose existence has yet to be proven a waste of time, hence why I don't plan to use this as an argument in a debate.

Edit: For all I care, you can swap the term "brain" with "complex neural system". Also, what definition of "sentience" are you using?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2012, 02:13 PM
RE: A sentient god? I don't think so.
(22-11-2012 10:51 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(22-11-2012 10:50 AM)Phaedrus Wrote:  P2 is not substantiated.

I wouldn't use this argument.
Yes, yes it is. We have proven it repeatedly through experimentation and observation. (ex. Anencephaly)

That aside, I consider arguing about the properties of a being whose existence has yet to be proven a waste of time, hence why I don't plan to use this as an argument in a debate.

Edit: For all I care, you can swap the term "brain" with "complex neural system". Also, what definition of "sentience" are you using?

A better way to phrase it is "Premise 2 is not self-evident and indisputable". AI research may very well prove it wrong in the not so distant future. I guess you could define an artificial neural network as a "complex neural system" but it's not what the phrase generally means. We call it a "neural network" metaphorically, it's not meant to be taken literally. Your argument looks valid, but it may not be sound.

"The reality of external objects does not admit of strict proof. On the contrary, however, the reality of the object of our internal sense (of myself and state) is clear immediately through consciousness." - Kant
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2012, 03:16 PM
RE: A sentient god? I don't think so.
(22-11-2012 02:13 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  A better way to phrase it is "Premise 2 is not self-evident and indisputable". AI research may very well prove it wrong in the not so distant future. I guess you could define an artificial neural network as a "complex neural system" but it's not what the phrase generally means. We call it a "neural network" metaphorically, it's not meant to be taken literally. Your argument looks valid, but it may not be sound.
Hence why I'm waiting for someone to tell me what it's flaws are, 'cause I ain't seeing them. All our knowledge seems to point towards premise number two. It may just be that you guys are working with a different definition of "sentient".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2012, 03:29 PM (This post was last modified: 22-11-2012 03:34 PM by fstratzero.)
RE: A sentient god? I don't think so.
(22-11-2012 10:47 AM)Vosur Wrote:  Hypothesis (from WLC): God is an immaterial, timeless, eternal and sentient being.

P - Premise | C - Conclusion
P1: God (hypothesis) is sentient.
P2: Sentience requires a brain.
P3: Brains are material.
C1: Therefore god has no brain.
C2: Therefore god (hypothesis) is not sentient.

Q.E.D.? Consider

Special pleading in 3... 2... 1...

The two negations I can think of are to argue from ignorance, and say other options for sentience may exist, or to say immaterialness negates the necessity for material processes.

Of course I'm thinking of the theists metaphysical nonsense position.

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2012, 03:31 PM
RE: A sentient god? I don't think so.
(22-11-2012 03:16 PM)Vosur Wrote:  Hence why I'm waiting for someone to tell me what it's flaws are, 'cause I ain't seeing them. All our knowledge seems to point towards premise number two. It may just be that you guys are working with a different definition of "sentient".

AI research is all about making silicon sentient, or conscious, if you prefer. If that happens, premise 2 is disproved, it is unsound.

"The reality of external objects does not admit of strict proof. On the contrary, however, the reality of the object of our internal sense (of myself and state) is clear immediately through consciousness." - Kant
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2012, 03:41 PM
RE: A sentient god? I don't think so.
(22-11-2012 03:31 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(22-11-2012 03:16 PM)Vosur Wrote:  Hence why I'm waiting for someone to tell me what it's flaws are, 'cause I ain't seeing them. All our knowledge seems to point towards premise number two. It may just be that you guys are working with a different definition of "sentient".

AI research is all about making silicon sentient, or conscious, if you prefer. If that happens, premise 2 is disproved, it is unsound.

But if this happens, would it not just redefine the term "brain"?

Consider

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
22-11-2012, 04:15 PM
RE: A sentient god? I don't think so.
(22-11-2012 03:41 PM)DLJ Wrote:  
(22-11-2012 03:31 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  AI research is all about making silicon sentient, or conscious, if you prefer. If that happens, premise 2 is disproved, it is unsound.

But if this happens, would it not just redefine the term "brain"?

Consider

But even so it wouldn't negate the need for a physical process.

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2012, 04:34 PM
RE: A sentient god? I don't think so.
(22-11-2012 03:41 PM)DLJ Wrote:  
(22-11-2012 03:31 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  AI research is all about making silicon sentient, or conscious, if you prefer. If that happens, premise 2 is disproved, it is unsound.

But if this happens, would it not just redefine the term "brain"?

Consider

I guess, if you like. Not how the fuckers trying to realize it realize it, but, meh, whatever.

"The reality of external objects does not admit of strict proof. On the contrary, however, the reality of the object of our internal sense (of myself and state) is clear immediately through consciousness." - Kant
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: