Materialism (championed by Darwinists) makes reason Impossible.

Sir! Sir! I know this one. Is it because DOC has a shallow grasp of most of the arguments being made but likes the conclusions because they agree with his world view and are presented in what appears to be clever philosophical form, coming from the authority of apparent learned scholars?


50 points to Gryffindor.
 
No I believe it comes from God.

The book cited in post #1 probably explains this better than I can. Hit the arrow to page 130 and it starts 5 lines down.

People outside the US might not be able to get this page.

http://books.google.com/books?id=PC...&resnum=1&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

You still haven't answered my question as to why we should take seriously the ravings of a mere philosopher with no qualifications in biochemistry, neurobiology or any related fields.
Again, what a surprise, xian apologist spouting off on subjects they don't understand.............

And as you've decided to invoke your sky daddy (again) I assume you'll be introducing some proof the existence of this 'god' of yours? Though you've refused to face up to you inability to show the 'soul' you're so fond of invoking exists.

Or are you just making stuff up (again) because you don't want to face up to reality?
 
The pain becomes a very central part of your conscience a couple of milliseconds after the cut. The processing milieu of the brain changes completely.
If it is a hand of a violinist or a braille-reading blind man's hand, it is a very essential part of the brain's interfaces with the world.
Certainly something central for the conscious violinist and his audience.

Or maybe you can port the Stradivarius directly to the motor cortex?

I'm not sure what relevance this has. Because someone puts value on something, that something becomes an integral part of "them"?
If a violinist looses a hand, do they stop being "them?
If a crack addict isn't able to get crack, do they stop being "them"?
 
Assuming materialism, you're correct. There's nothing to suggest that your brain, removed from your body and kept alive in a nutrient solution, would be unconscious or wouldn't be you in some way. It wouldn't be much of an existence, but it would still be you. A thinking brain in a vat.

Sensory deprivation experiments suggest you would begin hallucinating pretty rapidly in such a state. Perhaps that's the reality you've created, Joobz.
I'm not sure what point you are trying to make.
 
You still haven't answered my question as to why we should take seriously the ravings of a mere philosopher with no qualifications in biochemistry, neurobiology or any related fields.
Again, what a surprise, xian apologist spouting off on subjects they don't understand.............

And as you've decided to invoke your sky daddy (again) I assume you'll be introducing some proof the existence of this 'god' of yours? Though you've refused to face up to you inability to show the 'soul' you're so fond of invoking exists.

Or are you just making stuff up (again) because you don't want to face up to reality?

The ravings you refer to are as much philosophy as intelligent design is science. Good philosophers work with experts in the relevant fields and seek advice and criticism.
 
Last edited:
No I believe it comes from God.

Well that explains nothing again, it only adds a layer of worthless information.

You do understand that believe does not equal knowledge.

This is just a little information on the brain, learn.




Paul

:) :) :)
 
I'm not sure what relevance this has. Because someone puts value on something, that something becomes an integral part of "them"?
If a violinist looses a hand, do they stop being "them?
If a crack addict isn't able to get crack, do they stop being "them"?

If a violinist loses a hand, he ceases to be a violinist.
Becoming a violinist takes thousand of hours of practice from an early age.
His brain is mapped differently, the hand getting a lot more motor cortical mass than in the rest of us. Their brains are different on MRI scans.

Somebody who has dedicated at least four hours a day to practice all his life to become a violinist probably sees himself as a violinist. His audience would be coming to listen to his play for they consider him as one, also.

After losing his hand his name or his personal history would not change.
His personality would.
He would not be Mr. So-And-So, the Violinist.
Just Mr. So-And-So.
He could become a teacher or a critic. He also might commit suicide.

A crack addict with crack is cool and without crack it he is in agony.
After detox he still is a crack addict who'd have to watch it all his life with pain killers, sedatives and anti-allergic medications.

One question: Is a dog also his brain? A fish? A spider? A mollusc?
Where in the Animal Kingdom would you draw the line?
 
No, that is proof of the meta-space for yellow flashes! :D

Do not get me wrong, my eye-rubbing experience was not an attempt that yellow flashes do not exist. They might. Only that having the experience can be caused by direct physical stimulation of the sensory organ.

Some ladies cry out Oh, My God, Oh, My God, Oh, My God when their their sensory organs are physically stimulated.
And as far as know, I am not Him.
 
I'm not sure what relevance this has. Because someone puts value on something, that something becomes an integral part of "them"?
If a violinist looses a hand, do they stop being "them?
If a crack addict isn't able to get crack, do they stop being "them"?


If a violinist loses a hand, he ceases to be a violinist.
Becoming a violinist takes thousand of hours of practice from an early age.
His brain is mapped differently, the hand getting a lot more motor cortical mass than in the rest of us. Their brains are different on MRI scans.

Somebody who has dedicated at least four hours a day to practice all his life to become a violinist probably sees himself as a violinist. His audience would be coming to listen to his play for they consider him as one, also.


That's not what you were asked and this is becoming exceeding silly.

The question was "If a violinist loses a hand, do they stop being "them?" not, "If a violinist loses a hand, do they stop being a violinist?"

A violinist can simply retire rather than having a handectomy to cease being a violinist, but she's still the same person.


After losing his hand his name or his personal history would not change.
His personality would.
He would not be Mr. So-And-So, the Violinist.
Just Mr. So-And-So.
He could become a teacher or a critic. He also might commit suicide.


If I had some ham I could make a ham sandwich, if I had some bread.


A crack addict with crack is cool and without crack it he is in agony.
After detox he still is a crack addict who'd have to watch it all his life with pain killers, sedatives and anti-allergic medications.


Still the same person though.


One question: Is a dog also his brain? A fish? A spider? A mollusc?
Where in the Animal Kingdom would you draw the line?


What about if we draw the line at creatures whose reason might be impaired by embracing materialism, lest the goalposts completely disappear over the horizon?
 
Last edited:
Akhenaten, I am fully aware of the brain mechanisms that create the representation of the self. Believe, I do not need you telling me things about neuropsychology or the neural correlates of consciousness or identity, for that matter. I am quite well read in the subject, and unlike many others, familiar with anatomy, physiology and pharmacology.

It is not a question that I do not understand your argument.
I just think that it is not logically sound.

I also think that your idea about what a human being is has very little to do with what is happening in the real world of living human beings.

People are what they do, not what they think they do.
 
Joobz: And here is where we disagree. A computer is just the box WITH operating system. It does not need the interface and peripherals to be a computer.


You cannot run an OS just with the box.
Get coherent, will you.
 
If a violinist loses a hand, he ceases to be a violinist.
Becoming a violinist takes thousand of hours of practice from an early age.
His brain is mapped differently, the hand getting a lot more motor cortical mass than in the rest of us. Their brains are different on MRI scans.

Somebody who has dedicated at least four hours a day to practice all his life to become a violinist probably sees himself as a violinist. His audience would be coming to listen to his play for they consider him as one, also.

After losing his hand his name or his personal history would not change.
His personality would.
He would not be Mr. So-And-So, the Violinist.
Just Mr. So-And-So.
He could become a teacher or a critic. He also might commit suicide.

A crack addict with crack is cool and without crack it he is in agony.
After detox he still is a crack addict who'd have to watch it all his life with pain killers, sedatives and anti-allergic medications.
I am not arguing that experiences changes individuals. That's obvious and not the point. The point is that you, who are experiencing everything, exists in the brain and is of the brain. Everything else is the interface to that.

One question: Is a dog also his brain? A fish? A spider? A mollusc?
Where in the Animal Kingdom would you draw the line?
Which parts of the dog/fish/spider... can you remove and still have a dog/fish/spider that sees itself as a dog/fish/spider?
 
Joobz: And here is where we disagree. A computer is just the box WITH operating system. It does not need the interface and peripherals to be a computer.


You cannot run an OS just with the box.
Yes you can. Boot up the box and remove all other leads to it, and you'll still have the box running.

Get coherent, will you.
Snide comments do not help your argument.

ETA:
To emphasize my point one final time,
If you chop off a head, where does the dying consciousness reside?* In the head, or in the torso?
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom