Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

A question for atheists . . .

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A question for atheists . . .

    Do you actually believe intelligence comes from non-intelligence?
    . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

    . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

    Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

  • #2
    Originally posted by 37818 View Post
    Do you actually believe intelligence comes from non-intelligence?
    Yes.
    "[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
    --Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
      Yes.
      There not being a god, what would you call the fundamental basis?
      . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

      . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

      Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by 37818 View Post
        There not being a god, what would you call the fundamental basis?
        The fundamental basis of what?
        "[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
        --Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
          The fundamental basis of what?
          For intelligence coming from non-intelligence.

          We have an uncaused existence behind our caused existence. What else is fundamentally uncaused to account for intelligence?
          . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

          . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

          Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by 37818 View Post
            For intelligence coming from non-intelligence.
            Evolution explains easily how something intelligent could be generated from something not intelligent:
            If you have something that is making similar copies of itself but being destroyed at times by the environment around it, the types of copies that survive most to the age they can reproduce will be those that happen to be best suited to respond to the environment, and gradually over time we would see more and more types of responses to the environment accruing in the copies that were surviving the most. The first layer of such responses would be simple like "move towards light", and then the next layer might add "but not if light is too bright", and gradually over time hundreds and thousands of layers of evaluation would build up in organism with regard to responding to its environment.

            We know from computer science theory that a universe Turing machine (i.e. a computer capable of achieving any computational task whatsoever) can actually be incredibly simple (2 states, 3 colours). So 5 parts and you've reached generalized intelligence, that can respond to its environment not simply with the pre-programmed survival responses but with adaptive reasoning. So as soon as evolution happens to hit on that, it's reached 'intelligence' in a scientific sense. Of course over time it will expand on this building better and better intelligences because they survive better in different environments because they're more adaptable etc. Eventually you get fish levels of intelligence, then ape levels, then human levels etc. We can see the progression of intelligence through evolutionary history in the fossil records.

            We have an uncaused existence behind our caused existence. What else is fundamentally uncaused to account for intelligence?
            I don't understand what these sentences mean. By "uncaused" do you mean "not created by an intelligence"? That is not really what the word "uncaused" generally means, because if a physical law causes something (eg gravity causes an object to fall) we generally say there is cause and effect involved. So likewise evolution is a "cause".
            "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
            "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
            "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by 37818 View Post
              Do you actually believe intelligence comes from non-intelligence?
              Our brains are assembled from unintelligent matter. Intelligence is made in the brain. So, yes. What other options make any sense?
              “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
              “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
              “not all there” - you know who you are

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                Do you actually believe intelligence comes from non-intelligence?
                It depends on what you mean by "comes from." Intelligence is a property of certain very complex configurations of certain kinds of matter. Matter is not itself intelligent, but it acts in ways that we call intelligent when it is in those very complex configurations.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                  For intelligence coming from non-intelligence. We have an uncaused existence behind our caused existence. What else is fundamentally uncaused to account for intelligence?
                  I don't see that anything needs to be "fundamentally uncaused" in order to account for intelligence.
                  "[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
                  --Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                    I don't see that anything needs to be "fundamentally uncaused" in order to account for intelligence.
                    Well, then there would need to be an infinite series of causes regardless. In that there are fundamental causes along the way which leads up to us at the very least. Unless we suppose something from nothing, there being some sort of unique first cause. Either infinite, there being no actual first cause toward intelligence or one unique cause.
                    . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

                    . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

                    Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Doug Shaver View Post
                      It depends on what you mean by "comes from." Intelligence is a property of certain very complex configurations of certain kinds of matter. Matter is not itself intelligent, but it acts in ways that we call intelligent when it is in those very complex configurations.
                      Yes, and complexity has fundamental components.
                      . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

                      . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

                      Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                        Well, then there would need to be an infinite series of causes regardless. In that there are fundamental causes along the way which leads up to us at the very least. Unless we suppose something from nothing, there being some sort of unique first cause. Either infinite, there being no actual first cause toward intelligence or one unique cause.
                        Ok, I misunderstood. I thought you were saying that the direct cause of intelligence needed to be fundamentally uncaused, as opposed to some initial link in an incredibly long causal chain. I still don't understand the relevance of the question, though.
                        "[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
                        --Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                          Evolution explains easily how something intelligent could be generated from something not intelligent:
                          If you have something that is making similar copies of itself but being destroyed at times by the environment around it, the types of copies that survive most to the age they can reproduce will be those that happen to be best suited to respond to the environment, and gradually over time we would see more and more types of responses to the environment accruing in the copies that were surviving the most. The first layer of such responses would be simple like "move towards light", and then the next layer might add "but not if light is too bright", and gradually over time hundreds and thousands of layers of evaluation would build up in organism with regard to responding to its environment.

                          We know from computer science theory that a universe Turing machine (i.e. a computer capable of achieving any computational task whatsoever) can actually be incredibly simple (2 states, 3 colours). So 5 parts and you've reached generalized intelligence, that can respond to its environment not simply with the pre-programmed survival responses but with adaptive reasoning. So as soon as evolution happens to hit on that, it's reached 'intelligence' in a scientific sense. Of course over time it will expand on this building better and better intelligences because they survive better in different environments because they're more adaptable etc. Eventually you get fish levels of intelligence, then ape levels, then human levels etc. We can see the progression of intelligence through evolutionary history in the fossil records.
                          So given infinite time, there really being no one first beginning, there is very likey, and effectively an evolved intelligence that from our point in time to us has no beginning.
                          I don't understand what these sentences mean. By "uncaused" do you mean "not created by an intelligence"? That is not really what the word "uncaused" generally means, because if a physical law causes something (eg gravity causes an object to fall) we generally say there is cause and effect involved. So likewise evolution is a "cause".
                          By "uncaused" I mean not caused, created by anything at all. What is uncaused has no God.
                          Last edited by 37818; 01-24-2017, 08:09 AM.
                          . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

                          . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

                          Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                            Ok, I misunderstood. I thought you were saying that the direct cause of intelligence needed to be fundamentally uncaused, as opposed to some initial link in an incredibly long causal chain. I still don't understand the relevance of the question, though.
                            While I personally believe in an uncaused intelligence, on the premise that there is no such thing, there is an uncaused existence, and all causes and caused things are finite and temporal. What we perceive as intelligence has its origins.
                            . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

                            . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

                            Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by 37818 View Post
                              While I personally believe in an uncaused intelligence, on the premise that there is no such thing, there is an uncaused existence, and all causes and caused things are finite and temporal. What we perceive as intelligence has its origins.
                              I agree that what we perceive as intelligence has its origins. I'm wondering how the Cosmological Contingency Argument is at all relevant to the question of intelligence.
                              "[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
                              --Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                              19 responses
                              79 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post whag
                              by whag
                               
                              Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                              21 responses
                              129 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                              78 responses
                              415 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post tabibito  
                              Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                              45 responses
                              303 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Working...
                              X