Need help with suspected New Age wooer
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-09-2017, 08:20 AM
RE: Need help with suspected New Age wooer
Well. The debate’s over. He blinked bailed on me. Sadly, I hadn’t noticed before I asked him what he made of corpus callosum epilepsy and/or out of body experiences created in a lab. Now I guess I’ll never know if he thinks god does two for one deals sometimes.

Incidentally, how are posters putting crossed out words in their posts? I can't copy/paste formatting from Word on this tablet.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Sushisnake's post
13-09-2017, 08:27 AM
RE: Need help with suspected New Age wooer
(13-09-2017 08:20 AM)Sushisnake Wrote:  Well. The debate’s over. He blinked bailed on me. Sadly, I hadn’t noticed before I asked him what he made of corpus callosum epilepsy and/or out of body experiences created in a lab. Now I guess I’ll never know if he thinks god does two for one deals sometimes.

Incidentally, how are posters putting crossed out words in their posts? I can't copy/paste formatting from Word on this tablet.

use [ s ] and end with [ /s ] (without the spaces) to mark 'strikeout' text

If you reply to a message with one you can see how it is done coded

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
[+] 3 users Like unfogged's post
13-09-2017, 01:33 PM (This post was last modified: 13-09-2017 03:45 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Need help with suspected New Age wooer
I have never seen the "hard problem" of consciousness, as a problem at all.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/arch...ed/485558/
I know there are all kinds of theories of how it evolved, but I see it as very simple.
The sensation of consciousness is sensory input (rapidly) referenced to (stored) memory, and the output is what comes out as integrated product.
It's really a "sensation" (of the past) because what we experience as the "conscious moment" is already a few fractions of a second in the past.
It takes a few fractions of a second to reference the input to what has been laid down in memory, and integrated.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20...201459.htm
There is no reason to invoke woo to explain this.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
13-09-2017, 02:16 PM
RE: Need help with suspected New Age wooer
(13-09-2017 05:53 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  ...
The "science of the gaps" argument doesn't address what science actually says.

Science doesn't need to answer all questions, if the questions are themselves wrong. Consciousness is not explained by theism, it is mythologized. There is a difference. Mythology answers the question "why" when there may be no why at all.

On the other hand, scientists have:
* Correlated functions with brain structures,
* Correlated subjective states and reports with brain chemistry and activation,
* Turned consciousness on and off, and changed its state, with chemistry,
* Split consciousness in the same brain by cutting the corpus callosum in epileptics.

This means the soul theory, where the mind and brain are considered separate, is incorrect.

As for the "hard problem" of consciousness, it really is hard for theists but not so hard for materialists. We have subjective experiences because we are physical bodies with specific interests. Our bodies filter out information. We then focus on and therefore select out information which is relevant to our interests. Further, we are discrete, which means we can't directly share our subjective experiences with other discrete physical bodies. Even further, we interpret that selected information in accordance with our cultural constructs and emotional states, adding information which is not present in our original perceptions. That makes our subjective experiences our own little world.

It seems likely to me that our evolutionary history created such abilities to better serve our biological interests in indifferent and hostile environments. Our sense of self is a biological adaptation.

All this means that the personal identity aspect of our consciousness is not a separate being at all, as the soul theory maintains, but a symbolic construct created by our physical brains to process and interpret our experiences.

Oooooh! That! Bravo!

(used up my exclamation mark quota for the week)

(13-09-2017 01:33 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  I have never seen the "hard problem" of consciousness, as a problem at all.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/arch...ed/485558/
I know there are all kids of theories of how it evolved, but I see it as very simple.
The sensation of consciousness is sensory input (rapidly) referenced to (stored) memory, and the output is what comes out as integrated product.
It's really a "sensation" (of the past) because what we experience as the "conscious moment" is already a few fractons of a second in the past.
It takes a few fraction of a second to reference the input to what has been laid down in memory, and integrated.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20...201459.htm
There is no reason to invoke woo to explain this.

Ditto. Good post. It's a process.

And thanks for re-posting the article on AST. I was searching for that yesterday.

(13-09-2017 01:33 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  ... kids of theories ...

Is that one of those boy bands you young people are jiving to nowadays?

Big Grin

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
13-09-2017, 03:46 PM
RE: Need help with suspected New Age wooer
(13-09-2017 02:16 PM)DLJ Wrote:  
(13-09-2017 05:53 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  ...
The "science of the gaps" argument doesn't address what science actually says.

Science doesn't need to answer all questions, if the questions are themselves wrong. Consciousness is not explained by theism, it is mythologized. There is a difference. Mythology answers the question "why" when there may be no why at all.

On the other hand, scientists have:
* Correlated functions with brain structures,
* Correlated subjective states and reports with brain chemistry and activation,
* Turned consciousness on and off, and changed its state, with chemistry,
* Split consciousness in the same brain by cutting the corpus callosum in epileptics.

This means the soul theory, where the mind and brain are considered separate, is incorrect.

As for the "hard problem" of consciousness, it really is hard for theists but not so hard for materialists. We have subjective experiences because we are physical bodies with specific interests. Our bodies filter out information. We then focus on and therefore select out information which is relevant to our interests. Further, we are discrete, which means we can't directly share our subjective experiences with other discrete physical bodies. Even further, we interpret that selected information in accordance with our cultural constructs and emotional states, adding information which is not present in our original perceptions. That makes our subjective experiences our own little world.

It seems likely to me that our evolutionary history created such abilities to better serve our biological interests in indifferent and hostile environments. Our sense of self is a biological adaptation.

All this means that the personal identity aspect of our consciousness is not a separate being at all, as the soul theory maintains, but a symbolic construct created by our physical brains to process and interpret our experiences.

Oooooh! That! Bravo!

(used up my exclamation mark quota for the week)

(13-09-2017 01:33 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  I have never seen the "hard problem" of consciousness, as a problem at all.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/arch...ed/485558/
I know there are all kids of theories of how it evolved, but I see it as very simple.
The sensation of consciousness is sensory input (rapidly) referenced to (stored) memory, and the output is what comes out as integrated product.
It's really a "sensation" (of the past) because what we experience as the "conscious moment" is already a few fractons of a second in the past.
It takes a few fraction of a second to reference the input to what has been laid down in memory, and integrated.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20...201459.htm
There is no reason to invoke woo to explain this.

Ditto. Good post. It's a process.

And thanks for re-posting the article on AST. I was searching for that yesterday.

(13-09-2017 01:33 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  ... kids of theories ...

Is that one of those boy bands you young people are jiving to nowadays?

Big Grin

We could start one called the Brainy Boys ... hmmm. Dodgy

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
13-09-2017, 09:00 PM (This post was last modified: 13-09-2017 09:38 PM by Sushisnake.)
RE: Need help with suspected New Age wooer
(13-09-2017 01:33 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  I have never seen the "hard problem" of consciousness, as a problem at all.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/arch...ed/485558/
I know there are all kinds of theories of how it evolved, but I see it as very simple.
The sensation of consciousness is sensory input (rapidly) referenced to (stored) memory, and the output is what comes out as integrated product.
It's really a "sensation" (of the past) because what we experience as the "conscious moment" is already a few fractions of a second in the past.
It takes a few fractions of a second to reference the input to what has been laid down in memory, and integrated.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20...201459.htm
There is no reason to invoke woo to explain this.

Ooh! New links! Thanks, Bucky. I'm off to read them.

The theist did answer me: something about falling in love in the sunset sipping orange juice, but he claimed the link to the article on induced out of body experiences didn’t work ( it worked fine my end) and ignored the article on corpus callosum epilepsy entirely.

I read your links and posted them to him. It's dawned on me that his main evidentiary argument for subjective consciousness being god given is the experience of subjective consciousness itself, especially now he's stopped quote mining scientists and philosophers he's acknowledged do not agree with him in any way, shape and form. So you get a laundry list of experiences- from the taste of chocolate to falling in love in the sunset. I read him and start singing the first verse of " My Favourite Things" in my head. He's arguing from complexity.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Sushisnake's post
14-09-2017, 12:27 AM
RE: Need help with suspected New Age wooer
(13-09-2017 09:00 PM)Sushisnake Wrote:  He's arguing from complexity.

I am an engineer, and as such let me tell you that if two engineers are engineering two different machines who do the same thing, guess who is considered being the better "creator". The one who had to make a more complex machine or the one who could do the same with a more simple machine? Consider

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Deesse23's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: