Solving the Ignosticism (is meant for ignostics only)
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-08-2016, 03:48 AM
RE: Solving the Ignosticism (is meant for ignostics only)
I knew this debate sounded familiar :















A friend in the hole

"If we're going to be damned, let's be damned for what we really are." - Captain Picard
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2016, 03:54 AM
RE: Solving the Ignosticism (is meant for ignostics only)
(21-08-2016 01:26 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  
(21-08-2016 01:13 AM)theBorg Wrote:  At this point the Bible comes in. Besides, there is the secular reason for being the alive person, not a robot: dead body does not hear, does not see. I do hear, I do see. Thus, I am alive.
Robots do see and hear but have to be prgrammed to interpret those inputs and choose an action.

Your brain has been programmed, above the level of its basic GOD (Genetic Operating Dynamics), all your life.

It maybe only complexity that truly separates us from the robot.

(21-08-2016 12:41 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  So, iI have not read all the posts, but what is the relationship, if any, between "freewill" and sentience?

And I would tend to agree with Paleophyte, all our actions are determined by genetic or environmental factors. All decisions, concious or unconcious, are the result of multiple internal and external factors - it is only our false sense of superiority that fools us into thinking we have 100% conscious control over anything.

not only that every conscious choice we make is based around some arbitrary criteria

in the case of picking ice cream flavors the main criteria we use is which one of the damn things do we enjoy to stuffing our faces with the most
if we want a loan then the criteria is how low an interest payment, how long we have to repay it are the usual criteria we employ when taking out a loan

every decision we make works the same way...
the only difference between an AI and human intelligence IS that the AI can't augment its own parameters and capabilities based on data it collects while it is active... while humans do, we increase our capabilities by using the knowledge and experience we gain BUT our choices are limited to what we know or think we can do.... no matter how we slice it every choice is simply selecting one optino over others based on a criteria...

similarities between an android and a human
cpu = a brain
power system = digestive and respiratory system
wiring = blood vessels
inner frame = skeleton
muscles = servos/pistons/motors
ability to make choices = programming to make selection with respect to other alternatives based on a specified criteria
dies = runs out of power/ damaged beyond repair/ can no longer function
ability to think and act on its own = Artificial intelligence program
reproduces = manufacture more of em

bottom line is, both basically have the components that serve the exact same function but made of different materials
humans are a byproduct of evolution
robots are a by product of humans and machines built to make more machines
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Ace's post
21-08-2016, 04:19 AM
RE: Solving the Ignosticism (is meant for ignostics only)
Quote:humans are a byproduct of evolution
robots are a by product of humans and machines built to make more machines

Stretching the point a little, Ace, one might say that robots, being a product of the evolved human brain, are also a product of evolution!

Wink

Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Gloucester's post
21-08-2016, 06:34 AM
RE: Solving the Ignosticism (is meant for ignostics only)
"All decisions, concious or unconcious, are the result of multiple internal and external factors"

The thing is, if all of those choices are simply the results of internal and external factors, then why do I need to be aware of it ?

Why do I need to be conscious ?

Why can't this body & brain react to environmental stimuli on its own ? Why can't an unconscious person simply react to all those internal and external factors ?

I don't know why we are conscious, why it's necessary for us to experience this life in all its wonder and pain.

I do know that I can choose not to act. I can remain motionless for a time and repress my brains reactions. My body and brain present me with all kinds of internal and external factors, but in the end, I make a choice of how to react, a choice of what to do.

I can hold my breath under water. I consciously choose not to breathe for a period of time.
I can lie on a couch with a house full of children and let them run wild for a period of time.

And as morbid as it sounds, I can take my own life.
There would be a very large internal struggle, but in the end, the choice would be mine.

As skeptics, we weigh the evidence before we make the choice to believe a claim. Some would say that we have no choice but to believe it, when all the evidence justifies that belief.

Yet somehow, the religious have found a way to believe things without any evidence or justification and that choice bothers us to no end.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2016, 07:39 AM
RE: Solving the Ignosticism (is meant for ignostics only)
(21-08-2016 01:26 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  Robots do see and hear but
It is not the robot hears. It is us: the UNDERSTAND by "mind-vision", that robot "hears".

"If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" is a philosophical thought experiment that raises questions regarding observation and knowledge of reality. (Wiki)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2016, 07:47 AM
RE: Solving the Ignosticism (is meant for ignostics only)
At work.

(21-08-2016 07:39 AM)theBorg Wrote:  It is not the robot hears. It is us: the UNDERSTAND by "mind-vision", that robot "hears".

"If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" is a philosophical thought experiment that raises questions regarding observation and knowledge of reality. (Wiki)

Part of that reply is incoherent nonsense. Dear Borg, please strive to be better with your English. Yes

The second part would receive a different answer depending on how one's philosophical out look pertains.

Of course.... philosophy isn't the complete measure of the world, reality itself is.

So.... regardless of puny humans..... everything within the air disturbance of the falling mass will be effected.

(Not to mention the small but subtle ecosystem shift which will also be felt in the surrounding area for time to come.)

Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2016, 08:05 AM
RE: Solving the Ignosticism (is meant for ignostics only)
(20-08-2016 06:46 AM)theBorg Wrote:  The True God is

The True God ™ is _________________

a) undefined
b) imaginary
c) both a & b

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Full Circle's post
21-08-2016, 08:39 AM
RE: Solving the Ignosticism (is meant for ignostics only)
(21-08-2016 07:39 AM)theBorg Wrote:  
(21-08-2016 01:26 AM)Gloucester Wrote:  Robots do see and hear but
It is not the robot hears. It is us: the UNDERSTAND by "mind-vision", that robot "hears".

"If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" is a philosophical thought experiment that raises questions regarding observation and knowledge of reality. (Wiki)

sound is nothing more than vibrations that travel through a medium such as air, liquids, solids
hearing is nothing more than a process of detecting those vibrations via a receptors that specializes in that task, in our case ears
the mind aka brain simply receives what is picked up by the ears and tries to draw conclusions from it on its nature and the situation the individual is currently in

Quote:"If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"
yes, yes it does make a sound

the lack of receptors for the detection of sound vibrations DOESN'T mean they never happened since the fallen tree would be conclusive proof that there would've been a sound even if no one was ever there to notice it and hell we could go further and recreate the events to prove it
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
how to prove said sound occurred even though no one heard it.. consider the following experiment:

Positive claim: trees make sound when they fall and hit the ground
Null hypothesis: trees don't make any sound when they fall and hit the ground

tools needed: video and audio recorders, chainsaw, explosives, note pad, a profession to use them

Step1. find a good tree
step2. set up video and audio recorders and start recording
step3. start cutting a small notch then put an explosive in it and run away to a safe distance then light the fuse
step4. after said tree has fallen check the recordings to see if the sound of it falling and hitting the ground
step5. go find another tree and repeat this experiment, only this time you detonate it while your several dozen miles away
step6. go back to the tree and check the recordings and see if its the same as the previous one
and to no ones surprise the results are the same proving the positive claim resulting in the rejection of the null

Science Bitches, It Works
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Ace's post
21-08-2016, 09:49 AM
RE: Solving the Ignosticism (is meant for ignostics only)
(21-08-2016 08:39 AM)Ace Wrote:  
(21-08-2016 07:39 AM)theBorg Wrote:  It is not the robot hears. It is us: the UNDERSTAND by "mind-vision", that robot "hears".

"If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" is a philosophical thought experiment that raises questions regarding observation and knowledge of reality. (Wiki)

sound is nothing more than vibrations that travel through a medium such as air, liquids, solids
hearing is nothing more than a process of detecting those vibrations via a receptors that specializes in that task, in our case ears
the mind aka brain simply receives what is picked up by the ears and tries to draw conclusions from it on its nature and the situation the individual is currently in

Quote:"If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"
yes, yes it does make a sound

the lack of receptors for the detection of sound vibrations DOESN'T mean they never happened since the fallen tree would be conclusive proof that there would've been a sound even if no one was ever there to notice it and hell we could go further and recreate the events to prove it
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
how to prove said sound occurred even though no one heard it.. consider the following experiment:

Positive claim: trees make sound when they fall and hit the ground
Null hypothesis: trees don't make any sound when they fall and hit the ground

tools needed: video and audio recorders, chainsaw, explosives, note pad, a profession to use them

Step1. find a good tree
step2. set up video and audio recorders and start recording
step3. start cutting a small notch then put an explosive in it and run away to a safe distance then light the fuse
step4. after said tree has fallen check the recordings to see if the sound of it falling and hitting the ground
step5. go find another tree and repeat this experiment, only this time you detonate it while your several dozen miles away
step6. go back to the tree and check the recordings and see if its the same as the previous one
and to no ones surprise the results are the same proving the positive claim resulting in the rejection of the null

Science Bitches, It Works

But would it make a sound if the audio recorders weren't there? Smile

(Yes, yes it would, but how would we go about proving it?)

"If I ignore the alternatives, the only option is God; I ignore them; therefore God." -- The Syllogism of Fail
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2016, 10:21 AM
RE: Solving the Ignosticism (is meant for ignostics only)
(21-08-2016 09:49 AM)Reltzik Wrote:  
(21-08-2016 08:39 AM)Ace Wrote:  sound is nothing more than vibrations that travel through a medium such as air, liquids, solids
hearing is nothing more than a process of detecting those vibrations via a receptors that specializes in that task, in our case ears
the mind aka brain simply receives what is picked up by the ears and tries to draw conclusions from it on its nature and the situation the individual is currently in

yes, yes it does make a sound

the lack of receptors for the detection of sound vibrations DOESN'T mean they never happened since the fallen tree would be conclusive proof that there would've been a sound even if no one was ever there to notice it and hell we could go further and recreate the events to prove it
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
how to prove said sound occurred even though no one heard it.. consider the following experiment:

Positive claim: trees make sound when they fall and hit the ground
Null hypothesis: trees don't make any sound when they fall and hit the ground

tools needed: video and audio recorders, chainsaw, explosives, note pad, a profession to use them

Step1. find a good tree
step2. set up video and audio recorders and start recording
step3. start cutting a small notch then put an explosive in it and run away to a safe distance then light the fuse
step4. after said tree has fallen check the recordings to see if the sound of it falling and hitting the ground
step5. go find another tree and repeat this experiment, only this time you detonate it while your several dozen miles away
step6. go back to the tree and check the recordings and see if its the same as the previous one
and to no ones surprise the results are the same proving the positive claim resulting in the rejection of the null

Science Bitches, It Works

But would it make a sound if the audio recorders weren't there? Smile

(Yes, yes it would, but how would we go about proving it?)

not sure if sarcasm or serious, but what the heck I'll bite

just repeat the experiment a dozen times..... the results are always gonna be the same, so under what circumstances is it gonna be any different without the recorder ?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: