Chaos Magic

[annnnoid]

BTW Pixy....shall I assume 'google it' just doesn't cut it....even as a cheap excuse?

 

[PixyMisa]

....which was?

Google it.

 

[annnnoid]

Google it.

So we now have not only Argent but Pixy claiming that we have detected everything on that list…either with or without my qualification, it is not really clear. An extraordinary claim if ever there were one. And then I am accused of being staggeringly ignorant for challenging the claim. And then, to substantiate the claim, we have:

“google it”

…at least the creationists have the guts to actually defend themselves. I don’t think I’ve ever witnessed a more obvious display of skeptic spinelessness.

Of course, Pixy now bluntly insists that he made no such claim. Evidence:

“google it”

I think we can now replace the terms ‘bare assertion’ and ‘hand-waving’ at JREF with ‘Pixy’ and ‘Argent’.

 

[carlitos]

...there are a vast range of phenomenon that we cannot detect….and I provided a list of them. Essentially, there does not exist any consensus about what consciousness even is, let alone how to detect it or the infinite variety of ways in which we experience it. The very very very obvious point being that detecting any variety of neural activity is vastly different than detecting subjective consciousness itself or the very explicit and substantial phenomenon that is our experience of any of the words on that list.

OK, I deleted the play-by-play about your argument with others, which really doesn't interest me. Is the highlighted portion of this your main argument, supported by the second part? My perception is that you and others have imported an argument from somewhere else, and I missed parts of it. Again, just trying to understand your point here.

Unlike Argent, I have no problem finding evidence for my positions. Go through that list if you want. I haven’t actually read ‘Irreducible Mind’ but that would likely shatter just about every skeptic bone in your body.

Maybe it would. Since you haven't read it, and I haven't read it either, that's just wishful thinking though. If you have a point, I'd rather hear it in your own words.

Or you could just look for the truth in David Fincher’s brilliant little insight: “ You’re in charge, you’re not in control. Anyone who thinks they’re in control is nuts.” As in…why are we not in control?...what is it we’re not in control of?...and what, then, is in control of us? Personally, I think it has something to do with Shakespeare: ‘…all the world’s a stage…and all the men and women merely players…’

Proof by quote is not my thing either, and you're really starting to lose me - sounds like college kids getting high discussing deep thoughts.

 

[punshhh]

It's worth distinguishing between experiences you don't yet understand, but are easily explainable, and experiences that are currently inexplicable. There is likely to be many of the former and few of the latter.

Fair point, as I said I am not concerned with paranormal experience( or lack of it ).
For me the elephant in the room is the act of creation itself. Can it be understood and can anything be gleaned about the creator?

Or are we the blind leading the blind through a dust world of pure coincidence and chance events?

 

[carlitos]

You missed a lot of middle ground in between "Creator" and "pure coincidence and chance events." I take it that you don't understand evolution, if that's how you describe it.

 

[punshhh]

That's nice. Come back with some evidence, and we can talk.

Ancient chinese proverb say;

"Man stand with mouth open for long time! waiting for fried duck to fly in"

 

[punshhh]

You missed a lot of middle ground in between "Creator" and "pure coincidence and chance events." I take it that you don't understand evolution, if that's how you describe it.

Evolution is at times like the blind leading the blind, although I don't deny that it works.

I regard evolution as fundamental expression of what is in (for use of a better term) "the mind of God".

I feel I should point out to avoid misunderstanding, that I am not refering to any kind of Judao/christian God, more like a Hindu/Bhuddist God, or a Platonic God.

 

[tsig]

Ancient chinese proverb say;

"Man stand with mouth open for long time! waiting for fried duck to fly in"

Not if he's the Emperor.

 

[tsig]

Evolution is at times like the blind leading the blind, although I don't deny that it works.

I regard evolution as fundamental expression of what is in (for use of a better term) "the mind of God".

I feel I should point out to avoid misunderstanding, that I am not refering to any kind of Judao/christian God, more like a Hindu/Bhuddist God, or a Platonic God.

You think evolution is the mind of god but you don't know what kind of god you believe in?

How can you say anything about the mind of something when you're not even sure what kind it is?

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Evolution is at times like the blind leading the blind, although I don't deny that it works.

It doesn't "work" so much as "happen".

I regard evolution as fundamental expression of what is in (for use of a better term) "the mind of God".

It's actually just common sense. Genes which work well in their environment will survive and get passed on. Genes which don't work well in their environment won't survive and won't get passed on. There's no direction to it, no intent, nothing like that, it's just the logical consequence of the things we know to be true about the world around us.

 

[dafydd]

Evolution is at times like the blind leading the blind, although I don't deny that it works.

I regard evolution as fundamental expression of what is in (for use of a better term) "the mind of God".

I feel I should point out to avoid misunderstanding, that I am not refering to any kind of Judao/christian God, more like a Hindu/Bhuddist God, or a Platonic God.

Maybe you should read up on evolution and then come back.

 

[PixyMisa]

So we now have not only Argent but Pixy claiming that we have detected everything on that list

Yep. Sure. That's just a list of emotional states. We can detect those.

And then, to substantiate the claim, we have:

“google it”

Yet again, this is a complete misrepresentation of the facts. Even that brush-off was a link, and it followed numerous other links and references, all of which you ignored.

Of course, Pixy now bluntly insists that he made no such claim.

Completely wrong - as always.

 

[PixyMisa]

Ancient chinese proverb say;

"Man stand with mouth open for long time! waiting for fried duck to fly in"

If by that you mean that you don't have any evidence and never will - yes, we know.

 

[punshhh]

You think evolution is the mind of god but you don't know what kind of god you believe in?

How can you say anything about the mind of something when you're not even sure what kind it is?

I don't 'believe' in a God, belief is a highly over rated word (I'm sure I don't need to explain this to you guys).

I have a faith (I am aware of scientific explanations of faith), however I don't often define what I have a faith in. Such a definition may not be easy in this thread, or understood.

"Mind of God", is a phrase refering to an assumed (for the sake of argument) source of principles/laws of nature, such as gravity for example and evolution.

 

[punshhh]

It doesn't "work" so much as "happen".



It's actually just common sense. Genes which work well in their environment will survive and get passed on. Genes which don't work well in their environment won't survive and won't get passed on. There's no direction to it, no intent, nothing like that, it's just the logical consequence of the things we know to be true about the world around us.

I wager 'common sense' originated in the mind of God.

 

[punshhh]

Maybe you should read up on evolution and then come back.

I have a fairly good comprehension of evolution and I don't see 'the hand of God', shaping it. The scientific/rational explanation of evolution is fine for me.

In reference to the mind of God, I am suggesting that evolution is a fundamental principle of existence.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

I wager 'common sense' originated in the mind of God.

Why?

 

[PixyMisa]

I don't 'believe' in a God, belief is a highly over rated word (I'm sure I don't need to explain this to you guys).

No, the word is just fine.

I have a faith (I am aware of scientific explanations of faith), however I don't often define what I have a faith in. Such a definition may not be easy in this thread, or understood.

So it's just a general all-purpose irrationality?

"Mind of God", is a phrase refering to an assumed (for the sake of argument) source of principles/laws of nature, such as gravity for example and evolution.

No.

 

[punshhh]

Why?

My suggestion is that everything originated in the mind of God.