The Debate of God.

[Orias]

God is not what makes a collection of molecules into a person.

Says who?

You?

There is nothing magical about rain drops falling, and likewise there is nothing magical about the arrangement of molecules in a person from forming a person. It's just a result of the way they have come together. That's all.

I agree, magic most definitely does not cause one to recognize things

Consciousness is not formed from matter, it is formed from the INTERACTIONS between the many cells and molecules.

If consciousness is not formed from matter then how can we interact?

If consciousness is not formed from matter, then how can anything interact period?

Your argument sounds like a good one on the behalf of the existence of God. Saying that consciousness is not subject to matter and all.

Unless cells and molecules are excluded as "matter".

 

[apophenia]

If you are going to state that complexity gives rise to consciousness/feelings/will, you need to define how that works.

You simply haven't. You leave that out.

 

[apophenia]

Says who?

You?



I agree, magic most definitely does not cause one to recognize things



If consciousness is not formed from matter then how can we interact?

If consciousness is not formed from matter, then how can anything interact period?

Your argument sounds like a good one on the behalf of the existence of God. Saying that consciousness is not subject to matter and all.

Unless cells and molecules are excluded as "matter".

:rainbow1: welcome aboard

as kurt vonnegut put it, " I am some of the mud that got to sit up and look around ! lucky mud !"

 

[Daviso452]

As much as you may not want to admit this, you are effectively saying that matter is innately conscious. Which may be true !

The fine line you draw to avoid saying that outright is that it requires a certain (undefined) complex collection of inanimate matter for it to become animate.(phew !)

And I am saying that that is speculation, with no science to back it up.

There is a missing link between inanimate and animate in our scientific model.

That has been my point all along.

And the usual hocus pocus used to explain that missing link is 'emergent behaviour'.

I am taking the time to point out that 'emergent behaviour' is just two clever words.

If you look closely enough you will see that 'scientific' models have only that vague speculative notion to explain why a bunch of molecules feel better than James Brown !

BTW ... if asked why you (a bunch of chemicals) have feelings (sentience) and your answer is - chemicals ! - that is most definitely a circular argument.

The unanswered question would then be - why does a specific combination of chemicals worry about pimples ? LOL

Have a listen to "I pity inanimate objects" by Godley and Creme if you can find it. After this dialogue I think you will appreciate it.

I understand what you are saying, but you are not realizing something about yourself; you are giving consciousness some kind of special status.

What I fail to understand is why it is not possible that there is nothing special about life? LIFE IS NOT SPECIAL! There, I said it.

Yes, we do not know of any other life in the universe. Yes, it may be extremely rare. So what? Perhaps life is just a chemical reaction, just like everything else. The only difference is that the conditions for it are rare.

That is my belief. And that is where we seem to differ. You seem to take life as something special, like there is a reason for our existence. I do not. I have no reason to believe that. So I have no reason to believe that atoms are conscious.

What I do believe, like I said, is that on our planet, however many billions of years ago, a reaction happened that created the first cell. The properties of this reaction included reproduction of itself, and thus evolution began.

Now before you say it, I realize there is no evidence to back this up. And there is no evidence to back up that some higher power gave it these properties. HOWEVER, although my claim is not backed up, it is still reasonable; Science, and the collection of knowledge, is not something that we just immediately get; experiments take time. You seem to think that just because there is no evidence means it is wrong. But even though we do not currently have the information currently does not mean we never will.

Our advancements in neuroscience and psychology leads me to believe that one day we will have a full understanding of consciousness; I have researched it, and we currently do not. At least not concerning self-awareness. But there are several hypothesis' on the subject, and so it is only a matter of time.

Science has never had any conceivable limits inside our universe. There are plenty of things science has not gotten too, but no field of science has ever come to a complete halt.

 

[Orias]

I understand what you are saying, but you are not realizing something about yourself; you are giving consciousness some kind of special status.

What I fail to understand is why it is not possible that there is nothing special about life? LIFE IS NOT SPECIAL! There, I said it.

Yes, we do not know of any other life in the universe. Yes, it may be extremely rare. So what? Perhaps life is just a chemical reaction, just like everything else. The only difference is that the conditions for it are rare.

That is my belief. And that is where we seem to differ. You seem to take life as something special, like there is a reason for our existence. I do not. I have no reason to believe that. So I have no reason to believe that atoms are conscious.

What I do believe, like I said, is that on our planet, however many billions of years ago, a reaction happened that created the first cell. The properties of this reaction included reproduction of itself, and thus evolution began.

Now before you say it, I realize there is no evidence to back this up. And there is no evidence to back up that some higher power gave it these properties. HOWEVER, although my claim is not backed up, it is still reasonable; Science, and the collection of knowledge, is not something that we just immediately get; experiments take time. You seem to think that just because there is no evidence means it is wrong. But even though we do not currently have the information currently does not mean we never will.

Science has never had any conceivable limits inside our universe. There are plenty of things science has not gotten too, but no field of science has ever come to a complete halt.

Don't take this the wrong way, but what I got from this post was that you are claiming that even yourself is not aware.

If that is the case, then I have no further input into this thread besides a facepalm and a nice day.

If life is not special then you must lack the "special considerations" concerning yourself and the properties of science.

I think this "science" you speak of is in need of review.

 

[Daviso452]

So yes. I do not have evidence to back up what I am saying. Not completely anyway. But just because we do not know, does not mean we never will. And seeing the advancements in science, it is reasonable to assume that one day we will.

 

[Daviso452]

Don't take this the wrong way, but what I got from this post was that you are claiming that even yourself is not aware.

If that is the case, then I have no further input into this thread besides a facepalm and a nice day.

If life is not special then you must lack the "special considerations" concerning yourself and the properties of science.

I think this "science" you speak of is in need of review.

I'm tired, and so I'm getting incredibly sloppy. What I meant by "special" was that Apophenia seemed to be giving life "special properties," in the sense that we are somehow above the rest of the universe in some way, like in a hierarchy. The conditions for the start of life are special in the sense that they are rare.

Yes, I do have awareness. I just don't think there is anything incredibly unique about it. I see it as just another reaction, like adding heat to water. The only uniqueness I see in it is that we have only ever encountered it on earth.

 

[Daviso452]

Damn, I should probably be going to bed soon.

 

[Orias]

I'm tired, and so I'm getting incredibly sloppy. What I meant by "special" was that Apophenia seemed to be giving life "special properties," in the sense that we are somehow above the rest of the universe in some way, like in a hierarchy. The conditions for the start of life are special in the sense that they are rare.

Yes, I do have awareness. I just don't think there is anything incredibly unique about it. I see it as just another reaction, like adding heat to water. The only uniqueness I see in it is that we have only ever encountered it on earth.

I understand, I'm going to sleep after this post.

I don't think he is saying that, just that we are capable of recognizing how special the universe is.

Best regards and Xeper

 

[nnmartin]

Chemicals or not, I still have feelings. They are caused by chemicals, but the chemicals are real, and so the feelings are real. Do not dismiss them. Accept them.

What are feelings then?

do you just see them as subatomic particle waves that can be analysed in a laboratory?

 

[apophenia]

I understand what you are saying, but you are not realizing something about yourself; you are giving consciousness some kind of special status.

What I fail to understand is why it is not possible that there is nothing special about life? LIFE IS NOT SPECIAL! There, I said it.

Yes, we do not know of any other life in the universe. Yes, it may be extremely rare. So what? Perhaps life is just a chemical reaction, just like everything else. The only difference is that the conditions for it are rare.

That is my belief. And that is where we seem to differ. You seem to take life as something special, like there is a reason for our existence. I do not. I have no reason to believe that. So I have no reason to believe that atoms are conscious.

What I do believe, like I said, is that on our planet, however many billions of years ago, a reaction happened that created the first cell. The properties of this reaction included reproduction of itself, and thus evolution began.

Now before you say it, I realize there is no evidence to back this up. And there is no evidence to back up that some higher power gave it these properties. HOWEVER, although my claim is not backed up, it is still reasonable; Science, and the collection of knowledge, is not something that we just immediately get; experiments take time. You seem to think that just because there is no evidence means it is wrong. But even though we do not currently have the information currently does not mean we never will.

Our advancements in neuroscience and psychology leads me to believe that one day we will have a full understanding of consciousness; I have researched it, and we currently do not. At least not concerning self-awareness. But there are several hypothesis' on the subject, and so it is only a matter of time.

Science has never had any conceivable limits inside our universe. There are plenty of things science has not gotten too, but no field of science has ever come to a complete halt.

Consciousness satisfies the description many give to their idea of god.

The Creator. Without consciousness there is no universe. Think about it.

All-Knowing . All that is known, is known by consciousness.

The Ultimate Being. There is no 'being' without consciousness.

What I fail to understand is why it is not possible that there is nothing special about life? LIFE IS NOT SPECIAL! There, I said it.

So why would you respect life ?

And anyway, listen to what you are sayi9ng man !

If life is a valueless side effect, why would you want to live ?
And why would you care about truth, as you say you do ? If life isn't special, who gives a rat's arse about truth ?

 

[nnmartin]

Throughout the past, religion has hindered knowledge and led to ignorance. When you have ignorance, you have fear, and fear can be controlled.

Pot - Kettle - Black

 

[nnmartin]

RE:There are plenty of anomalies within evolution and abiogenesis that indicate Design.

Such as...?

Male to female ratio , human sexuality, and perhaps mimicry for starters.

 

[apophenia]

Pot - Kettle - Black



You mean if you spread the atheist dogma the world will be a better place.

Ever heard of people like Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot?

they weren't too keen on reilgion.

It's worth noting that during the period of 'colonisation', the standard British procedure was to identify and eliminate the keepers of religion in the cultures they encountered. This was part of a process of weakening their psyches to enable easier subjugation.
It is also the reason that so many of those cultures became damaged to the point of appearing utterly primitive and uncultured.

 

[apophenia]

I found that godley and creme song. Not sure how to post vids, but the youtube embed code is ...

Godley & Creme - I Pity Inanimate Objects (10cc) - YouTube

 

[nnmartin]

So yes. I do not have evidence to back up what I am saying. Not completely anyway. But just because we do not know, does not mean we never will. And seeing the advancements in science, it is reasonable to assume that one day we will.

In that case why should your assumptions hold any more value than an assumption of the existence of God or Intelligent Design?

 

[apophenia]

huh. that was easy. enjoy.

 

[Daviso452]

So why would you respect life ?

And anyway, listen to what you are sayi9ng man !

If life is a valueless side effect, why would you want to live ?
And why would you care about truth, as you say you do ? If life isn't special, who gives a rat's arse about truth ?

This is the true meat and potatoes of this discussion.

I live because I want to. That want is caused by the chemicals in my brain. I admit it. Does that make it wrong? No.

In the long run, I guess there is no real point. So what? That just means you can fill it in with your own, which I'm sure you have already done. Just because life itself does not have meaning does not mean there is no meaning to be had; it just means you have to make it up.

That is what I meant earlier by believing in humanism. To better our own society is my purpose. But with regards to what you said earlier, it is not us centering on our own species that is the problem; it is greed, or rather the expectation to get something with no consequence. Many people are ignorant of what it truly takes to get their smart phones, or their computers. Those who do do not seem to care about how people in other countries suffer for it.

In order to be a better society as a world, we must relinquish ourselves of such greed and instead work for what we want. To truly do this, I believe, in of itself will result in the betterment of the ecosystem.

But that is going on a bit of a tangent.

 

[apophenia]

I live because I want to.

!!!!!!!!

 

[Daviso452]

In that case why should your assumptions hold any more value than an assumption of the existence of God or Intelligent Design?

Because I do have reasoning and evidence to back it up. Just not entirely. Science has given us a consistent pattern of growth, and there is no reason to think it will stop. So, it IS reasonable to believe it will continue. However, since it hasn't happened already, I cannot prove it will.

But there is a chance that something else could be responsible for consciousness, though still explained by science. You never know. All you can do is look at the patterns.

However with God, there is nothing to support his existence besides personal testimonials. Other than that there is no evidence. Nothing to continue. Nowhere to even start!

Science has started, and it has continued, and the past tells us it will continue. That is logic. God has no evidence. Nothing to base claims of off. Nothing to continue. It is illogical to think that it eventually will.