Evolution based on random mutations and natural selection

[Monk Of Reason]

I think you're misunderstanding. Think for a little before responding.
If you know for a fact that they do not exist physically, which I do as well... we have no choice but to succumb to the fact that non-physical things can only create non-physical things. A physical brain cannot create something that doesn't exist. It would be creating something from nothing.

If I have a thought in my head it isn't a physical object that I hold in my hand. The "concept" exists and the root existence of that concept is a structure or chemical bond in my brain. That chemical bond is real. That chemical bond is physical. That structure is not reliant upon a larger version of that structure out in the universe.

 

[Unification]

What law are you speaking of? If you're talking about the first law of thermodynamics, then all that states is that matter and energy cannot be created from nothing. It says nothing about the creation of ideas.

The the thing that "already exists physically" is the brain itself. Computers create plenty of things that don't exist in the physical world (such as the landscapes in a computer game). Is an immaterial mind required to explain that too?

Then "ideas" would have to be non-physical.
Computers aren't alive or conscious.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Why we can't create something to do the same while the inanimate nature did ? Can we invent a robot to think and make a decision by his own without being programmed for a specific job ?

What makes us conscious ? storing information alone won't make us conscious, how
such complexity evolved by the inanimate nature ?

Complexity and design are two different things. You can have incredibly complex things in nature that are not designed and you can have incredibly simplistic things that are designed. Complexity=/= design. This is a misconception you must rid yourself of. The billions of years of evolution and processes create things far more complicated that we are capable of creating.

 

[Parsimony]

Then "ideas" would have to be non-physical.

Ideas are non-physical, right. That doesn't mean that they must have a non-physical origin. My computer example demonstrated this.

Computers aren't alive or conscious.

Which further goes to show that if computers can generate concepts, then life and/or consciousness aren't necessary to explain them.

 

[FearGod]

Complexity and design are two different things. You can have incredibly complex things in nature that are not designed and you can have incredibly simplistic things that are designed. Complexity=/= design. This is a misconception you must rid yourself of. The billions of years of evolution and processes create things far more complicated that we are capable of creating.

Why it is normal to have a conscious matter by nature due to the billions of years ?
Of course nature got no plan and got no design.

Can time alone do the magic, just matter and billion of years then we got a complex conscious brain ?

 

[Unification]

If I have a thought in my head it isn't a physical object that I hold in my hand. The "concept" exists and the root existence of that concept is a structure or chemical bond in my brain. That chemical bond is real. That chemical bond is physical. That structure is not reliant upon a larger version of that structure out in the universe.

What is that particular thought in your head? It doesn't have to be held in your hand. The concept does exist, depending on the concept it would either have to be a "non-physical" concept deriving from a real chemical bond or a physical concept deriving from a real chemical bond.

The chemical bond is always real, and a larger version is irrelevant.

This entire law is combined with using deductive logic of the "delusional" thought, not a thought of something real coupled with an all physical universe. They are incompatible with law, and that is why intelligent scientists stay away from the mind-body problem. They are aware of this. A delusional thought cannot be created if the brain and all of its many complex processes are all physical. Nothing that isn't real cannot be created from all physical and real processes. Any way it's looked it.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Why it is normal to have a conscious matter by nature due to the billions of years ?
Of course nature got no plan and got no design.

Because it is what we observe. It would be "unnatural" if we were incapable of observing it occur naturally.

Can time alone do the magic, just matter and billion of years then we got a complex conscious brain ?

The evidence suggests that yes yes it can. In fact we know certain leaps and bounds are well known and established.

 

[Sapiens]

Try Sam Harris on The Mystery of Consciousness

 

[Sapiens]

Try Sam Harris on The Mystery of Consciousness

 

[Monk Of Reason]

What is that particular thought in your head? It doesn't have to be held in your hand. The concept does exist, depending on the concept it would either have to be a "non-physical" concept deriving from a real chemical bond or a physical concept deriving from a real chemical bond.

The chemical bond is always real, and a larger version is irrelevant.

If I do the math in my head of 2+2= 4 then that doesn't have to represent anything in the universe. There are no physical objects that are represented there. Physical objects CAN be represented within these contexts and thus is the basis of cognition. However the "physical" requirement is not there. The origin to these concepts is physical and those chemical bonds. Those chemical bonds are physical.

This entire law is combined with using deductive logic of the "delusional" thought, not a thought of something real coupled with an all physical universe. They are incompatible with law, and that is why intelligent scientists stay away from the mind-body problem. They are aware of this. A delusional thought cannot be created if the brain and all of its many complex processes are all physical. Nothing that isn't real cannot be created from all physical and real processes. Any way it's looked it.

What you seem to be missing is that concepts are concepts (non-physical in nature) with a physical origin. The physical origin to these concepts or delusions as you may want to call them, do not require an external physical mirror to exist.

There are scientists, great scientists that do exactly what you state they stay away from. It is a whole section of neurobiology. If you have further questions I suggest you talk to one.

 

[Marisa]

How the fish survived on land for millions of years before having legs ? fishes don't need legs in water but only fins, why the fish need to leave the water to live on land, was it due to curiosity or searching for foods ? what forced the fish to leaves its environment to entirely a different one ? humans lived close to the sea for millions of years will they eventually evolve into fishes (reverse evolution if i may say), i think human won't evolve into fishes regardless of the time they can live in the sea because it isn't their environment and they'll die before being evolved to a fish (like creature).

 

[Unification]

Ideas are non-physical, right. That doesn't mean that they must have a non-physical origin. My computer example demonstrated this.

Which further goes to show that if computers can generate concepts, then life and/or consciousness aren't necessary to explain them.

Electrical impulses and energy create thoughts. Some form of energy would then have to be a non-physical entity.

 

[Parsimony]

Electrical impulses and energy create thoughts. Some form of energy would then have to be a non-physical entity.

How would you define non-physical? In some sense, energy itself is non-physical. Energy doesn't exist by itself any more than spin or charge exist by themselves. Energy is a property that is possessed by particles and can be transferred from one particle to another.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Electrical impulses and energy create thoughts. Some form of energy would then have to be a non-physical entity.

I think you are confusing non-matter with non-physical.

 

[Unification]

If I do the math in my head of 2+2= 4 then that doesn't have to represent anything in the universe. There are no physical objects that are represented there. Physical objects CAN be represented within these contexts and thus is the basis of cognition. However the "physical" requirement is not there. The origin to these concepts is physical and those chemical bonds. Those chemical bonds are physical.

What you seem to be missing is that concepts are concepts (non-physical in nature) with a physical origin. The physical origin to these concepts or delusions as you may want to call them, do not require an external physical mirror to exist.

There are scientists, great scientists that do exactly what you state they stay away from. It is a whole section of neurobiology. If you have further questions I suggest you talk to one.

A physical origin creating something non-physical. Sounds precisely like the mind-body issue in an all material world view.
Thoughts are derived from external stimuli... We can add Newton's laws to this too and take it a step further.
They don't require an external mirror, would be true if the mind is non-matter.

Delusion can only exist itself with an immaterial mind.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

A physical origin creating something non-physical. Sounds precisely like the mind-body issue in an all material world view.
Thoughts are derived from external stimuli... We can add Newton's laws to this too and take it a step further.
They don't require an external mirror, would be true if the mind is non-matter.

Delusion can only exist itself with an immaterial mind.

The issue is that concepts don't "exist" in the same way. The issue with the mind body problem is not really an issue at all unless you force the idea of what is "real" onto what we "interpret to be real" from our own subjective experience. The mind is non-matter. The consequence of the mind do not have to be physical.

 

[Unification]

How would you define non-physical? In some sense, energy itself is non-physical. Energy doesn't exist by itself any more than spin or charge exist by themselves. Energy is a property that is possessed by particles and can be transferred from one particle to another.

Then we are getting into an energy-frequency-and vibration discussion, which would also be great.

 

[Unification]

The issue is that concepts don't "exist" in the same way. The issue with the mind body problem is not really an issue at all unless you force the idea of what is "real" onto what we "interpret to be real" from our own subjective experience. The mind is non-matter. The consequence of the mind do not have to be physical.

"The mind is non-matter." Entire point . Thank you, we do agree then.

It only becomes a real issue in an all-material and physical universe, and an all physical brain point of view.

 

[ArtieE]

"The mind is non-matter." Entire point . Thank you, we do agree then.

It only becomes a real issue in an all-material and physical universe, and an all physical brain point of view.

In theory if we had sensitive enough measuring equipment we could measure exactly what goes on in the brain of a fully conscious person. Then if we for example slowly render this person unconscious we should be able to find out exactly which processes are required for consciousness.

 

[Unification]

In theory if we had sensitive enough measuring equipment we could measure exactly what goes on in the brain of a fully conscious person. Then if we for example slowly render this person unconscious we should be able to find out exactly which processes are required for consciousness.

Separate from mind and thought completely and read the Old Testament of the bible. Pure consciousness is a metaphor for "God."

It's a book on consciousness, life, science, the human body, the human brain and how its a duplicate of the universe, DNA/RNA, proteins, enzymes, energy, light, intelligence in motion, the cosmos, truth, what it means to be a conscious being instead of an unconscious being, etc. It explains consciousness and where it is, where it derives from, what it is, and much more.

It's pleasing to see some branches of science exploring the "non-physical." (Consciousness-dark matter-etc.) they really have no choice but to.