Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 85

Thread: Origin of the Mind/Mental States

  1. #31
    tWebber lee_merrill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    427
    Amen (Given)
    184
    Amen (Received)
    110
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    The vast majority of scientists do not.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...and_technology
    It seems the actual number is around 2/3 of scientists disbelieve in God.

    Why have you "explained away the validity of thought" by positing a mechanistic explanation. Everything else in the Natural Universe has a "mechanistic explanation", why not consciousness?
    Because nature only gives us survival, there is no requirement for us to have valid perception of truth.

    Who says that "Every brain, every mind is a point of supernatural activity"?
    C.S. Lewis said that, actually.

    Many animals have self awareness, i.e possess consciousness. Are they too at a point of alleged "supernatural activity"?
    And that's up for debate, whether animals are self-aware or not.

    But what is not up for debate is the taking of the validity of thought as an axiom, it cannot be the conclusion of a proof.

    Best wishes,
    Lee
    "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

  2. #32
    tWebber lee_merrill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    427
    Amen (Given)
    184
    Amen (Received)
    110
    Quote Originally Posted by JimL View Post
    It's true we can't explain exactly how the brain works, but assuming there is something else, an immaterial thinking thing, and having no idea how that would work, or even how such a thing could interact with the physical brain, is not only not evidential, but useless.
    Unless the alternative is worse, is insanity.

    You seem to have a preconcieved notion of what thought is from the outset. I think that's clouding your thinking!
    I think I thought that I thought I think. I think...

    But can you address what I posted about circular reasoning?

    Blessings,
    Lee
    "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

  3. #33
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    9,587
    Amen (Given)
    2281
    Amen (Received)
    1586
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    It seems the actual number is around 2/3 of scientists disbelieve in God.
    By contrast, 95% of Americans believe in some form of deity or higher power

    http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...720#post588720

    Because nature only gives us survival, there is no requirement for us to have valid perception of truth.
    Consciousness and true knowledge of the nature of our surroundings enhance the likelihood of survival.

    C.S. Lewis said that, actually.
    CS Lewis was a literary figure and theologian, not a scientist.

    And that's up for debate, whether animals are self-aware or not.
    It’s not up for debate. More to the point many of our fellow humans possessed consciousness equal to ours, e.g. Homo Erectus did wall paintings and learned to control fire. Neanderthals were also a sentient, sapient species. They had arts, crafts, ceremonial burial, cared for their wounded. The first evidence of bringing flowers to a grave dates from Neanderthal times, as is the earliest use of coal as fuel. If, as some like to say, consciousness is an indication of a ‘soul’ then Neanderthals and Homo Erectus were equally ‘soul’ endowed.

    But what is not up for debate is the taking of the validity of thought as an axiom, it cannot be the conclusion of a proof.
    The higher animals have ‘consciousness’ and ‘think’, as did the six human species with whom we co-existed in some instances. This is not up for debate.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  4. #34
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    10,366
    Amen (Given)
    1277
    Amen (Received)
    1280
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    Unless the alternative is worse, is insanity.
    Insanity? Explain.
    I think I thought that I thought I think. I think...

    But can you address what I posted about circular reasoning?

    Blessings,
    Lee
    Since you can give no clear definition as to what it is that you mean by thought, or more specifically, what you mean by an immaterial thinking thing, then your assertion of circular reasoning is an argument against yourself, not against me.

  5. #35
    tWebber lee_merrill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    427
    Amen (Given)
    184
    Amen (Received)
    110
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    Consciousness and true knowledge of the nature of our surroundings enhance the likelihood of survival.
    But how do you know this?

    The higher animals have ‘consciousness’ and ‘think’, as did the six human species with whom we co-existed in some instances. This is not up for debate.
    A sweeping statement! But I think the original argument stands, you cannot prove the validity of thought, this must be an axiom. And naturalists are required to prove the validity of thought, but any such proof has to assume the validity of thought at the outset.

    Best wishes,
    Lee
    "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

  6. #36
    tWebber lee_merrill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    427
    Amen (Given)
    184
    Amen (Received)
    110
    Quote Originally Posted by JimL View Post
    Insanity? Explain.
    If thought is not valid, if our reasoning has no foundation, "Here there be dragons."

    Since you can give no clear definition as to what it is that you mean by thought, or more specifically, what you mean by an immaterial thinking thing, then your assertion of circular reasoning is an argument against yourself, not against me.
    I mean reasoning, making arguments and following them to conclusions, like we are doing here. The naturalists have no valid basis for proving the validity of reasoning, my argument does apply to you, as long as you insist that reasoning is valid.

    Blessings,
    Lee
    "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

  7. #37
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    9,587
    Amen (Given)
    2281
    Amen (Received)
    1586
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    But how do you know this?
    Survival skills are learnt. The more knowledge and understanding we have of our surroundings, including the habits of predatory animals lurking in the undergrowth, the greater our probability of survival.

    A sweeping statement!
    Not “sweeping” at all. The existence of numerous sentient and sapient human species has been established by abundant archaeological and biological evidence. E.g. Homo Erectus survived 2 million years. Neanderthals overlapped with us Homo Sapiens and there is biological evidence of interbreeding.

    http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/...ossils/species

    As for other creatures several (e.g. chimpanzees) are self-aware and exhibit altruism, empathy, and gratitude...all of which indicates a degree of consciousness.

    But I think the original argument stands, you cannot prove the validity of thought, this must be an axiom. And naturalists are required to prove the validity of thought, but any such proof has to assume the validity of thought at the outset.
    Everything else in the universe has been shown to have a mechanistic explanation, why would consciousness be an exception?
    Last edited by Tassman; 11-08-2018 at 12:32 AM.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  8. #38
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    9,587
    Amen (Given)
    2281
    Amen (Received)
    1586
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    The naturalists have no valid basis for proving the validity of reasoning, my argument does apply to you, as long as you insist that reasoning is valid.
    Unlike you what the "naturalists" have is tested empirical evidence to support the 'validity' and 'soundness' of their reasoning.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  9. #39
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    10,366
    Amen (Given)
    1277
    Amen (Received)
    1280
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    If thought is not valid, if our reasoning has no foundation, "Here there be dragons."
    You're simply making assumptions, i.e. that mechanistic reasoning is not real reasoning. Thats why I asked you to explain what you mean by thought, and or reasoning, from your immaterialistic perspective and how your explanation differs from the mechanistic view.

    I mean reasoning, making arguments and following them to conclusions, like we are doing here. The naturalists have no valid basis for proving the validity of reasoning, my argument does apply to you, as long as you insist that reasoning is valid.
    Again, you're simply making assumptions about the nature of "reasoning." It's your argument that has no valid basis for reasoning, because unlike the materialistic perspective, you have no explanation as to how you are defining an immaterial mind, how it works, how it reasons, or basically anything about it.

  10. #40
    tWebber lee_merrill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    427
    Amen (Given)
    184
    Amen (Received)
    110
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    Survival skills are learnt. The more knowledge and understanding we have of our surroundings, including the habits of predatory animals lurking in the undergrowth, the greater our probability of survival.
    Yes, but knowing the rules of calculus and astrophysics would not seem to confer a survival advantage.

    As for other creatures several (e.g. chimpanzees) are self-aware and exhibit altruism, empathy, and gratitude...all of which indicates a degree of consciousness.
    But the argument still stands, if reason comes from non-reason, it cannot be trusted.

    Everything else in the universe has been shown to have a mechanistic explanation, why would consciousness be an exception?
    J. B. S. Haldane said: "If my mental processes are determined wholly by the motions of atoms in my brain, I have no reason to suppose that my beliefs are true…and hence I have no reason for supposing my brain to be composed of atoms."

    Best wishes,
    Lee
    "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •