Brain vs soul.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-03-2017, 02:06 PM (This post was last modified: 19-03-2017 02:10 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Brain vs soul.
(19-03-2017 01:35 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(19-03-2017 01:00 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  You are conflating the word Capacity with Capability.
Demonstrated capacity is a contradiction
Facepalm

Capacity = potential power, whereas, Capability = developmental ability

Potential generally refers to a currently unrealized ability
Self-awareness is the "accommodative power" (not developmental ability) for introspection and the ability to recognize oneself as an individual separate from the environment and other individuals.
Life is a characteristic distinguishing physical entities having biological processes, such as signaling and self-sustaining processes, from those that do not, either because such functions have ceased, or because they never had such functions and are classified as inanimate

The fact that it has biological processes, such as signaling and self-sustaining processes proves it is alive
The fact that it is living proves it the potential/capacity for introspection
The fact that it is eating proves it has the ability to recognize itself among other things.

When you combine these 3 factors you get SELF AWARENESS
Drinking Beverage
Self Awareness is the birthright of all living organisms.
Smartass

Likewise:
A Computer/Tentacle that is signaling, self-sustaining, with the capacity for introspection & the ability to recognize itself will be considered self aware


You are cherry picking interpretation of words to get a meaning out of the definition that does not match how the word is being used in context. As demonstrated by every fucking source that you cited, and chose to quote-mine. I don't care about your ad-hoc bastardized definition of 'self-awareness', because the one being used in the articles you cited completely disagreed with every assertion you tried to make.

Probably why you didn't bother reply to my whole post, because you're a spineless quote-miner.

Now, once again, piss off. Drinking Beverage
You do realize you would have to provide alternative interpretations of the words to prove it is being cherry picked & used out of context right?
All I see are:
Unsubstantiated, Opinions. Tsk Tsk
Consider

Please ignore below.
Just updating my list of Dunning Kruger examples in this thread for a research paper I am doing. Nothing personal.

EvolutionKills
19-03-2017 "You are cherry picking interpretation of words to get a meaning out of the definition that does not match how the word is being used in context."
To date no example of what exactly has been cherry picked & no alternative interpretations of the words have been provided to prove it is being used out of context
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-03-2017, 02:32 PM
RE: Brain vs soul.
(19-03-2017 02:06 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(19-03-2017 01:35 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  You are cherry picking interpretation of words to get a meaning out of the definition that does not match how the word is being used in context. As demonstrated by every fucking source that you cited, and chose to quote-mine. I don't care about your ad-hoc bastardized definition of 'self-awareness', because the one being used in the articles you cited completely disagreed with every assertion you tried to make.

Probably why you didn't bother reply to my whole post, because you're a spineless quote-miner.

Now, once again, piss off. Drinking Beverage
You do realize you would have to provide alternative interpretations of the words to prove it is being cherry picked & used out of context right?
All I see are:
Unsubstantiated, Opinions. Tsk Tsk
Consider

Please ignore below.
Just updating my list of Dunning Kruger examples in this thread for a research paper I am doing. Nothing personal.

EvolutionKills
19-03-2017 "You are cherry picking interpretation of words to get a meaning out of the definition that does not match how the word is being used in context."
To date no example of what exactly has been cherry picked & no alternative interpretations of the words have been provided to prove it is being used out of context


You are trying (and failing) to get 'self-awareness' to have an even broader application than 'consciousness', which already doesn't apply to all life, when it's clear in context that 'self-awareness' has a much more specific and narrowly defined meaning which refers to an aspect of higher level cognition. Dogs and cats have consciousness, but lack self-awareness; because they appear to lack the ability to recognize their own awareness (i.e. they fail the mirror test).


Self-awareness is the capacity for introspection and the ability to recognize oneself as an individual separate from the environment and other individuals. It is not to be confused with consciousness in the sense of qualia. While consciousness is a term given to being aware of one's environment and body and lifestyle, self-awareness is the recognition of that awareness.


You are committing the very fallacy the definition warns of, mistaking mere consciousness and awareness of surroundings with self-awareness, which has a much more specific meaning and criteria. This more specific meaning and criteria is supported by all of the sources you have both cited, and dishonestly quoted-mined.


You are not fooling anybody here. So would you kindly stop lying, obfuscating, cherry-picking, quote mining, and generally being a dishonest little shit? I mean, if you have the capability to that is. Drinking Beverage

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like EvolutionKills's post
19-03-2017, 03:16 PM
RE: Brain vs soul.
(19-03-2017 11:48 AM)kim Wrote:  To mate, a male will insert his hectocotylus into the female's mantle cavity and deposit spermatophores.

I love it when you talk dirty

Quote:This process may take up to several hours, depending on the species.

Nobody like a braggart.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like unfogged's post
19-03-2017, 03:30 PM (This post was last modified: 19-03-2017 03:35 PM by JesseB.)
RE: Brain vs soul.
I'd like to point out (because I hate repeating myself), that all the evidence is that is needed HAS been presented (multiple times by now). It seems like Shane wants EVERY single person here to say the exact same thing to him, with the exact same sources (or different ones that also back up their case). Otherwise he'll claim that people haven't backed up their position with sources.....

Very dishonest. I have no intention of providing sources for stuff that's already been sourced elsewhere in this thread. Which is why a few of my things weren't sourced. The information is "common knowledge" AND provided in this thread multiple times. My sourcing it would be a ridiculous waste, and utterly redundant.

I would really like the lies claiming that points haven't yet been backed up stop. Everyone know's it's dishonest. Your failure to bother to open and READ those sources are not the failure of the dozens of people here to PROVIDE THEM. And no, if its already sourced in this thread they don't have to source it EVERY time they reference it. So can we move on from this ridiculous claim. Particularly when the one pointing fingers has provided NO sources, the most he's provided are a couple of definitions (where he also didn't provide the entire definition).

Meaningful communication has to start with some understanding of the topic. Shane you've failed to demonstrate even a basic grasp of the topics you're trying to comment on.


People talking to shane "here look at this book, it says right here..."

Shane's reaction "Lalalalala I can't hear you, where's your source (its right here dude) (Shane closes eyes too) I don't see it (ITS RIGHT HERE DUDE) whatever, you clearly failed to provide a source (sticks fingers in ears, keeps eyes closed, hums loudly and thinks to himself, they didn't show me any evidence, after all I didn't see any evidence).

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
19-03-2017, 04:22 PM
RE: Brain vs soul.
(19-03-2017 03:30 PM)JesseB Wrote:  ---
Meaningful communication has to start with some understanding of the topic. Shane you've failed to demonstrate even a basic grasp of the topics you're trying to comment on.
---

Yes?
This is understood by all. Except A Shame. He is an incompetent moron.

It's ok Hug A Shame has done this to himself by not stopping his krazy train of bullshit when given the chance to do so.

Let's look at this scientifically.
Hypothesis: A Shame is a troll.
We can not prove this. It is not what science does.
So, how do we disprove this?

Let us say, A Shame's first 5 posts. Ok. Those could have been the result of misunderstanding or miscommunication or incomprehension on his part as well on the part of others.

Then, we take the next 5 posts. A Shame's odd comments become adamently defended by only him. Even though the content may change, the structure remains the same.

Next 5 posts. Same.

After several posts go by, A Shame is given encouragement to strip it all back to the beginning and learn where he has drifted into krazy town. The helping hand is refused.

More posts: defensive, offensive, taunting. Begging to be whipped and then wailing of his persecution.
A Shame has fallen into the classic pattern of martyrdom.

Much of the above is troll behavior.
Troll or simply a dunderheaded moron, A Shame can not be disproved to be a Troll, in light of the above mentioned behavior.

Meaningful communication can not take place with a troll.
Meaningful communication is not what a troll is after.

Agnostic Shame is now a mere chew toy, to be discarded when it gets soggy, smelly and unsanitary. Shy

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like kim's post
19-03-2017, 07:15 PM (This post was last modified: 19-03-2017 07:23 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Brain vs soul.
(19-03-2017 02:32 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(19-03-2017 02:06 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  You do realize you would have to provide alternative interpretations of the words to prove it is being cherry picked & used out of context right?
All I see are:
Unsubstantiated, Opinions. Tsk Tsk
Consider

Please ignore below.
Just updating my list of Dunning Kruger examples in this thread for a research paper I am doing. Nothing personal.

EvolutionKills
19-03-2017 "You are cherry picking interpretation of words to get a meaning out of the definition that does not match how the word is being used in context."
To date no example of what exactly has been cherry picked & no alternative interpretations of the words have been provided to prove it is being used out of context


You are trying (and failing) to get 'self-awareness' to have an even broader application than 'consciousness', which already doesn't apply to all life, when it's clear in context that 'self-awareness' has a much more specific and narrowly defined meaning which refers to an aspect of higher level cognition. Dogs and cats have consciousness, but lack self-awareness; because they appear to lack the ability to recognize their own awareness (i.e. they fail the mirror test).


Self-awareness is the capacity for introspection and the ability to recognize oneself as an individual separate from the environment and other individuals. It is not to be confused with consciousness in the sense of qualia. While consciousness is a term given to being aware of one's environment and body and lifestyle, self-awareness is the recognition of that awareness.


You are committing the very fallacy the definition warns of, mistaking mere consciousness and awareness of surroundings with self-awareness, which has a much more specific meaning and criteria. This more specific meaning and criteria is supported by all of the sources you have both cited, and dishonestly quoted-mined.


You are not fooling anybody here. So would you kindly stop lying, obfuscating, cherry-picking, quote mining, and generally being a dishonest little shit? I mean, if you have the capability to that is. Drinking Beverage

You posit that introspection is a key aspect for self awareness.

The definition does not say "self awareness is introspection..."
It says "self awareness is the capacity for introspection..."

The capacity for introspection does not equivocate introspection.

It's simple English.

Eg.
If someone tells you this Barrel has the capacity for 5 buckets of water it does not mean the barrel is the same thing as 5 buckets of water.

By your logic:
If my house caught fire & I asked you to bring me 5 buckets of water you could just throw me an empty barrel. Gasp

You do not even understand what capacity means.

A capacity is an unrestricted potential.
Eg. My Barrel can hold 5 buckets of water. It has a capacity for 5 buckets of water.

An incapacity is a restricted potential.
Eg. My Barrel cannot hold 6 buckets of water. It has an incapacity for 6 buckets of water.

To prove that any living thing has an incapacity for introspection you would first have to set a limit for introspection.
What's the defined limit for introspection & how did you get it?

If I can't find dinosaurs in the sea it does not mean the sea has an incapacity for dinosaurs

I did not conflate consciousness with self awareness because I posit that self awareness is a pre requisite of consciousness.
You however, posit that consciousness is a prerequisite of self awareness because you do not know the meaning of the word capacity.

You read the definition as:
Self Awareness is the ability of Introspection & the ability to recognize introspection, the environment & others.
Which is why you think metacognition = self awareness

Our inability to prove dogs have metacognition does not disprove self awareness in dogs.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-03-2017, 07:34 PM
RE: Brain vs soul.
Can't edit above post. I wanted to add:

If you are going to claim the second part of the definition refers to an ability for introspection, etc. Then why is it that all the articles Bucky posted claim self awareness is manifest at birth but the first signs of introspection occur after 18 months.

They too understand that self awareness precedes introspection.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-03-2017, 08:42 PM (This post was last modified: 19-03-2017 08:51 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Brain vs soul.
The edit function is messed up. Sorry for spamming, can mods increase the time limit on editing?
In the last reply I should have used the word meta cognition & not introspection.

I wanted to add another point in my reply to EK.

Jellyfishes, octopus tentacles, Portuguese man-o-wars, immortal worms, & every single living organism has agency of sensory recognition. (which is a form of introspection)

Introspection is not limited to cognition but it is limited to agency of self.

Everything I write below is from WIKI.

Introspection can determine any number of mental states including: sensory & cognitive.

A mental state is a state of mind that an agent is in.

Agency may either be classified as unconscious, involuntary behavior, or purposeful, goal directed activity (intentional action).

Agency is the capacity of an actor to act in a given environment.

There is no universally agreed definition of what a mind is and what its distinguishing properties are. It holds the power of
... recognition...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-03-2017, 09:24 PM
RE: Brain vs soul.
Facepalm

Here we go again.

This is getting very old..

[Image: latest?cb=20100305231209]

[Image: giphy.gif]


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
19-03-2017, 09:35 PM
RE: Brain vs soul.
(19-03-2017 03:16 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(19-03-2017 11:48 AM)kim Wrote:  To mate, a male will insert his hectocotylus into the female's mantle cavity and deposit spermatophores.

I love it when you talk dirty

Quote:This process may take up to several hours, depending on the species.

Nobody like a braggart.

[Image: bacon_flavor.png]

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like EvolutionKills's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: