Which evolved first, consciousness or senses

[ImmortalFlame]

But humans have the same eyes, the same ears and the same senses, then why the input data processed differently.

You think everyone's eyes, ears and senses are all the same? You never met people who need glasses, hearing aids, etc.? We have the same basic "equipment", but with very slight variations between individuals that result in each one behaving or processing input differently. It's the exact same with the human brain.

Humans have the same brains, but cars may have different engines and the driver uses the engine and
not the engine uses itself, incomparable

See above. We all have the same basic "equipment" with slight variations, just as every engine is more-or-less a variation on a similar formula - but that doesn't mean everyone uses it the same way, or is even capable of doing so.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

So in short you assume the universe always exists

No I don't. I've never made any such assumptions - I'm asking YOU how YOU have concluded that it HASN'T always existed. That's the point. I've never assumed that it has or hasn't, all I have done is ask YOU how you concluded that it HASN'T.

but not God,

I've never said anything about God, either. Stop putting words in my mouth.

my next question regardless of who always exists God or the universe,
Do you think it's normal for a thing to always exist without being a product of something else?

That question doesn't even make sense. I have no idea what "normal" means in this context. We're talking about the origin of the Universe and all physical laws contained therein. How am I supposed to know what is considered "normal" in this context? Do you think it's "normal" for an effect to precede a cause? If not, then what you consider "normal" is irrelevant to reality, because we already know that effects at the quantum level can precede a cause.

 

[FearGod]

You think everyone's eyes, ears and senses are all the same? You never met people who need glasses, hearing aids, etc.? We have the same basic "equipment", but with very slight variations between individuals that result in each one behaving or processing input differently. It's the exact same with the human brain.

We have the same senses regardless of the tiny variations, all of us will see the monkey as a monkey and never as a lion or to taste
the orange juice as coffee....etc

See above. We all have the same basic "equipment" with slight variations, just as every engine is more-or-less a variation on a similar formula - but that doesn't mean everyone uses it the same way, or is even capable of doing so.

And everyone uses his brain in different way.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

We have the same senses regardless of the tiny variations, all of us will see the monkey as a monkey and never as a lion or to taste
the orange juice as coffee....etc

This doesn't really contradict anything I've said.

And everyone uses his brain in different way.

Which is exactly the point I was making originally. All you've really done in this post is agree with me.

 

[FearGod]

No I don't. I've never made any such assumptions - I'm asking YOU how YOU have concluded that it HASN'T always existed. That's the point. I've never assumed that it has or hasn't, all I have done is ask YOU how you concluded that it HASN'T.

If not always exists and not started by a thing and not by nothingness, so what's your assumptions?

I've never said anything about God, either. Stop putting words in my mouth.

You said why the universe not always exists, so by default (not God)

That question doesn't even make sense. I have no idea what "normal" means in this context. We're talking about the origin of the Universe and all physical laws contained therein. How am I supposed to know what is considered "normal" in this context? Do you think it's "normal" for an effect to precede a cause? If not, then what you consider "normal" is irrelevant to reality, because we already know that effects at the quantum level can precede a cause.

Where in nature that we can see the superposition of cause and effect?

 

[FearGod]

This doesn't really contradict anything I've said.


Which is exactly the point I was making originally. All you've really done in this post is agree with me.

Except that i believe that i use my brain, the same way that i use my eyes, hands ....etc
If the brain will act by itself then we'll look crazy, what makes a physical body a sane decision maker?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

If not always exists and not started by a thing and not by nothingness, so what's your assumptions?

I don't make any. That's the point. I don't know exactly how the Universe started, but I have no reasonable means to dismiss any possibility.

You said why the universe not always exists, so by default (not God)

No, whether or not the Universe has always existed, God could still exist. I've never asserted anything about God.

Where in nature that we can see the superposition of cause and effect?

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121002145454.htm

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Except that i believe that i use my brain, the same way that i use my eyes, hands ....etc
If the brain will act by itself then we'll look crazy, what makes a physical body a sane decision maker?

The brain, since it too is a physical aspect of the body. "You" and your brain are essentially the same (or a composite of the same input and processing powers of the brain and body).

 

[FearGod]

The brain, since it too is a physical aspect of the body. "You" and your brain are essentially the same (or a composite of the same input and processing powers of the brain and body).

So we should fix the physical brains of the criminals and the murderers so it can process the data in a moral way.
How the senses and the brain evolved in such away as to work in harmony, coincidences and billions of years?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

So we should fix the physical brains of the criminals and the murderers so it can process the data in a moral way.

Erm, no. And how on earth could you possibly get that from anything I've said?

How the senses and the brain evolved in such away as to work in harmony, coincidences and billions of years?

It's called evolution. Have you heard of it?

 

[FearGod]

.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121002145454.htm

Your source itself hasn't the answer

"The real challenge is finding out where in nature we should look for superpositions of causal orders,"

 

[FearGod]

Erm, no. And how on earth could you possibly get that from anything I've said?

If we have problems with the eyes then we try to fix the eyes, so the criminals should have a problem in processing the data, need software
maybe, yes reprogramming.

It's called evolution. Have you heard of it?

Which evolved first the senses or the brain to handle it?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Your source itself hasn't the answer

"The real challenge is finding out where in nature we should look for superpositions of causal orders,"

"Physicists have now shown that in quantum mechanics it is possible to conceive situations in which a single event can be both, a cause and an effect of another one."
"Now an international team of physicists led by Caslav Brukner from the University of Vienna have shown that even the causal order of events could be in such a superposition."
SOURCE: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-10/uov-qcr100212.php

And from the paper itself:
"All known situations that respect causal order, including space-like and time-like separated experiments, are captured by this framework in a unified way. Surprisingly, we find correlations that cannot be understood in terms of definite causal order. These correlations violate a 'causal inequality' that is satisfied by all space-like and time-like correlations. We further show that in a classical limit causal order always arises, which suggests that space-time may emerge from a more fundamental structure in a quantum-to-classical transition."
"We find that, surprisingly, more general correlations are possible, which are not included in the standard quantum formalism. These correlations are incompatible with any underlying causal structure: they allow performing a task—the violation of a ‘causal inequality’—which is impossible if events take place in a causal sequence."
SOURCE: http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.4464

 

[ImmortalFlame]

If we have problems with the eyes then we try to fix the eyes, so the criminals should have a problem in processing the data, need software maybe, yes reprogramming.

False equivocation. A person can still commit criminal acts with a fully functioning brain. Do you assume all criminals must be mentally ill?

Which evolved first the senses or the brain to handle it?

Basic sensory input most likely evolved before primitive brains, but that's depending on how you define either. You could argue that a nucleus is a primitive brain. The fact is that both the brain (as we now currently know it) and the senses that provide input to it evolved together in tandem.

 

[FearGod]

"Physicists have now shown that in quantum mechanics it is possible to conceive situations in which a single event can be both, a cause and an effect of another one."
"Now an international team of physicists led by Caslav Brukner from the University of Vienna have shown that even the causal order of events could be in such a superposition."
SOURCE: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-10/uov-qcr100212.php

And from the paper itself:
"All known situations that respect causal order, including space-like and time-like separated experiments, are captured by this framework in a unified way. Surprisingly, we find correlations that cannot be understood in terms of definite causal order. These correlations violate a 'causal inequality' that is satisfied by all space-like and time-like correlations. We further show that in a classical limit causal order always arises, which suggests that space-time may emerge from a more fundamental structure in a quantum-to-classical transition."
"We find that, surprisingly, more general correlations are possible, which are not included in the standard quantum formalism. These correlations are incompatible with any underlying causal structure: they allow performing a task—the violation of a ‘causal inequality’—which is impossible if events take place in a causal sequence."
SOURCE: http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.4464

And how that applied when there's no space, no time and nothing to start with.
0 + 0 = 0 , how a one will come from zeros, simple math.

 

[FearGod]

False equivocation. A person can still commit criminal acts with a fully functioning brain. Do you assume all criminals must be mentally ill?

So why their brains malfunction?

Basic sensory input most likely evolved before primitive brains, but that's depending on how you define either. You could argue that a nucleus is a primitive brain. The fact is that both the brain (as we now currently know it) and the senses that provide input to it evolved together in tandem.

So the born child has the evolved brain, i wonder why they look like just a crying doll while having the evolved brain.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

And how that applied when there's no space, no time and nothing to start with.
0 + 0 = 0 , how a one will come from zeros, simple math.

You have no basis on which to assert that there WAS nothing to start with, and you have no basis on which to assert that "nothingness" is either capable nor incapable of producing anything. If that's false, please present one example of "Nothing" that has been examined and tested.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

So why their brains malfunction?

Whose brains?

So the born child has the evolved brain, i wonder why they look like just a crying doll while having the evolved brain.

What are you talking about?

 

[FearGod]

You have no basis on which to assert that there WAS nothing to start with, and you have no basis on which to assert that "nothingness" is either capable nor incapable of producing anything. If that's false, please present one example of "Nothing" that has been examined and tested.

Then the alternative is a thing that always exists which is God or you call it the universe.
If not then what's your view of it.

 

[FearGod]

Whose brains?

The brains of the criminals, need reprogramming with a moral software.

What are you talking about?

The brain of a baby child should be already evolved by the evolution process, the baby can see, can hear but
the brain know nothing.