brain/mind

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

As I have stated many times I am a material nihilist. All human concepts and notions are equaly false and equaly true. However through the method of science and aggregate observation( a equaly true and equaly false notion) it would appear that approximations can be made which have predictive validity towards the apparent 9if illusiory) reality that we seem to find ourselves possibly in.

WTF? If the predictive validity of jumping off a tall building always leads to squash pie, what does it mean to say that the human concept of gravity is equally true and equally false?

~~ Paul

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

If people thought about it at all they would find the prospect of never being able to stop existing far more frightening.

Amen, brother!

~~ Paul

 

[aggle-rithm]

WTF? If the predictive validity of jumping off a tall building always leads to squash pie, what does it mean to say that the human concept of gravity is equally true and equally false?

~~ Paul

Because you don't KNOW it always leads to that result, until you try it forever...

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Because you don't KNOW it always leads to that result, until you try it forever...

I agree, but that doesn't make the concept equally true and equally false, does it? If so, then absolutely everything is equally true and equally false, which makes the phrase meaningless.

Maybe I don't know what "equally true and equally false" means. It sounds dangerously postmodern to me.

~~ Paul

 

[aggle-rithm]

I agree, but that doesn't make the concept equally true and equally false, does it? If so, then absolutely everything is equally true and equally false, which makes the phrase meaningless.

Maybe I don't know what "equally true and equally false" means. It sounds dangerously postmodern to me.

~~ Paul

Agreed...logically, something can't be equally true and false at the same time. At most there would be an equal probability that something is true or false...and that clearly isn't the case in the jumping-off-the-building example.

 

[maatorc]

I think what for me is the more interesting question has not been much considered - why do people have in investment in wanting to believe that the mind is "supernatural" - or that anything is supernatural?

The idea of mind has no investment in the 'supernatural' There is nothing supernatural, it is a misnomer and non-sequitor in that that it is impossible for anything to be 'super' beyond the 'natural': This idea is all just the standard hangup of the modern skeptical and Brights movement. Mind is as 'natural' as matter.

 

[maatorc]

So prove that mind is not an emergent property of matter.

The 'proof' is possible only on a personal experiential level, as phenomena and noumena are incommensurable. This is why the JREF MDC will not work beyond demonstrating scientifically currently inexplicable events which are accepted as but have not been proven to be psychic, supernatural or occult events or powers.
As to proof that mind is not an emergent property of matter, ordinarily those able to provide the proof do not give a damn about those who deny it is possible to give proof, and they are not performing clowns willing to indulge it. Denial, derision, and ridicule are the very reasons they will not even think about indulging skepticism.

 

[articulett]

The 'proof' is possible only on a personal experiential level, as phenomena and noumena are incommensurable. This is why the JREF MDC will not work beyond demonstrating scientifically currently inexplicable events which are accepted as but have not been proven to be psychic, supernatural or occult events or powers.
As to proof that mind is not an emergent property of matter, ordinarily those able to provide the proof do not give a damn about those who deny it is possible to give proof, and they are not performing clowns willing to indulge it. Denial, derision, and ridicule are the very reasons they will not even think about indulging skepticism.

One would think that those able to provide proof would care about a million dollars--they could donate it to their favorite guru, and science could learn something new.

Of course, I hear that skeptics give off bad vibes and the powers never seem to work around them anyhow. Bummer.

 

[cyborg]

As to proof that mind is not an emergent property of matter, ordinarily those able to provide the proof do not give a damn about those who deny it is possible to give proof, and they are not performing clowns willing to indulge it.

Put up or shut up.

The 'proof' is possible only on a personal experiential level, as phenomena and noumena are incommensurable.

You have nothing in other words.

 

[maatorc]

One would think that those able to provide proof would care about a million dollars--they could donate it to their favorite guru, and science could learn something new.Of course, I hear that skeptics give off bad vibes and the powers never seem to work around them anyhow. Bummer.

Your customary incomprehensble twaddle.

 

[maatorc]

1... Put up or shut up.
2... You have nothing in other words.

1... I have not offered to.
2... You have not properly read or lack the ability to understand the post, and I have not the slightest interest in your would-be manipulative rhetoric.

 

[The Atheist]

If people thought about it at all they would find the prospect of never being able to stop existing far more frightening.

LOL! The "mother-in-law argument"!

I love this one. You spend a billion years being nice to your mother-in-law, then realise you still have infinity to go...

 

[billydkid]

LOL! The "mother-in-law argument"!

I love this one. You spend a billion years being nice to your mother-in-law, then realise you still have infinity to go...

Did you see the Larry David episode where Larry and his wife were renewing their vows? Larry balked at the idea that their vows continued after death - for all eternity. It is one thing to be devoted to a single person for a life time. Beyond that is asking a little too much.

 

[Slimething]

Look it up yourself.

Sorry, bobo. You make the claim; you post the evidence. I've done a pretty good job of debunking you and I firmly believe you are between a rock and a hard place now.

Can't or won't post evidence of your claims? Don't know where to turn? Just leave.

 

[articulett]

Look what I found...

A quote from maatorc. I think it's very telling, don't you. I found it here:

http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=4802&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

All is vibration: Ultimately all awareness is a consciousness of vibrations.
We cannot be aware of anything but vibrations.
Energy is ALL, is mind, is Being, is God.

Hence, in due time expect science to formulate a mathematics of mind = energy = vibration = universe = Being = God.

I really like the part in bold. It boils down, both the essence of woo coupled with the holier-than-thou arrogance of woo.

 

[billydkid]

The idea of mind has no investment in the 'supernatural' There is nothing supernatural, it is a misnomer and non-sequitor in that that it is impossible for anything to be 'super' beyond the 'natural': This idea is all just the standard hangup of the modern skeptical and Brights movement. Mind is as 'natural' as matter.

In fact, many people have an investment in the idea that the mind is NOT of this world and is immaterial and everlasting. You seem to suggest that I advocate the notion of the supernatural, when in fact I have been a vocal advocate of fact that the notion of the "supernatural" is a nonsense notion. You can use the word natural, but clearly you believe that the mind exists, but is somehow immaterial or has its origins in the immaterial - that the mind exists independent of the brain. If it is not of this world, if it is something more/other than an emergent property of the brain, then, clearly, you are talking about something "supernatural".

 

[billydkid]

Your customary incomprehensble twaddle.

Funny, I understood the post easily. I have a feeling you did too.

 

[Slimething]

1... I have not offered to.

In actuality, you have nothing to offer.

2... You have not properly read or lack the ability to understand the post, and I have not the slightest interest in your would-be manipulative rhetoric.

Tranlation: I can't communicate well in written form and it's your fault!

 

[articulett]

What makes you think there is anything non-physical that needs to be accounted for? "Non-physical" is just another way of saying "Doesn't exist".

Oh....I thought it was code for "imaginary"...

 

[articulett]

The idea of mind has no investment in the 'supernatural' There is nothing supernatural, it is a misnomer and non-sequitor in that that it is impossible for anything to be 'super' beyond the 'natural': This idea is all just the standard hangup of the modern skeptical and Brights movement. Mind is as 'natural' as matter.

I just think it's soooo precious when a woo comes to a skeptics forum to preach AND to criticize skeptics and those of like ilk. I especially love it when they get all pissy and tantrum-like amidst their preachy woo nonsense. It's a never ending game...

I always think it's so funny that these woo have all these special powers and magical insights, and yet they waste their divine and special lives trying to bludgeon skeptics into believing their "higher truths" and then scolding them when skeptics do the thing that skeptics do--ask for evidence.

Aren't you so glad that maatorc came here to tell us what the "standard hang up of the modern skeptical and Brights movement" is? And gee-golly, how surprised I am that the woos think we're closed-minded. Every woo is quite certain that their woo is the really true woo that we should be clambering for.