• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

How Can Molecules Think?

doubtingmerle

I'll think about it.
Site Supporter
Jan 28, 2003
9,969
2,521
Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟532,270.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
In a science section can we talk about "soul". If so Start by defining it.
I was asking you if the answer you wanted to your question is that the difference between man and ape is the soul.

If that is not how you would answer, how would you answer your question?

Humans and chimps share a surprising 98.8 percent of their DNA. How can we be so similar--and yet so different?​
 
Upvote 0

Astrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
11,052
3,695
40
Hong Kong
✟188,686.00
Country
Hong Kong
Gender
Female
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
If that's the case then nothing we do will ever make any real difference to anything, and we may as well not even try to find out what's true, because our conclusions will be pre-determined and therefore useless.

" We"? You are describing yourself
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Aug 19, 2018
23,075
15,702
72
Bondi
✟371,025.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Yes, I sort of forgot about that so apologize for all my beliefs and opinions. As if they have no place in a science discussion. So I guess on this point we must first agree on criterion for "human". How about DNA for a start? It has become the main way of classifying life on earth.
Humans and chimps share a surprising 98.8 percent of their DNA. How can we be so similar--and yet so different?
Comparing Chimp, Bonobo and Human DNA | AMNH.

No, let's keep opinions and beliefs available for sharing. But in this section we should offer evidence for why we hold them.

As to 'human' (or Homo), it's simply a classification:

  • Kingdom – Animalia.
  • Phylum- Chordata.
  • Class- Mammalia.
  • Order – Primates.
  • Family – Hominidae.
  • Subfamily – Homininae.
  • Genus – Homo.
Yeah, we're very close to chimps and apes. But small differences can result in major changes. I can change one line of computer code out of many thousands and it will result in something that might be recognisably similar to the original but which is still, in some ways, significantly different.

But do we really need to define what we are? That's a given in science. Some people might think we're special in some way - and we are certainly more intelligent than anything else around. But someone has to be top of the food chain. Luckily for us...it's us.
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Aug 19, 2018
23,075
15,702
72
Bondi
✟371,025.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

Astrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
11,052
3,695
40
Hong Kong
✟188,686.00
Country
Hong Kong
Gender
Female
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
Regarding free will, see Free Will | Christian Forums.

Regarding the rest of your list, yes, humans are qualitatively different from other species in brain power. But other animals have many of these attributes at a smaller scale.

Just because a peacock amplifies its courting display far beyond other animals, or a human uses its brainpower far beyond other animals, or a skunk uses its ability to stink far above other animals, does not mean they are not animals.
A bat can fly. People are hopelessly inept physically.
It also has the mental capacity to home in on things by use of sonar.
People CAN do this, at a level maybe 0.01 percent of a bats
MENTAL ability.

They are morally superior in that they steal not,
nor yet do theym urder children.
 
Upvote 0

Astrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
11,052
3,695
40
Hong Kong
✟188,686.00
Country
Hong Kong
Gender
Female
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
Upvote 0

Akita Suggagaki

Well-Known Member
Jul 20, 2018
10,103
7,221
70
Midwest
✟369,417.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Cambridge Dictionary has this:

'the spiritual part of a person that some people believe continues to exist in some form after their body has died, or the part of a person that is not physical and experiences deep feelings and emotions'.

But if someone wants to say it exists then it is encumbent on them to define what they mean by it.
Now that is an interesting definition. First off, yes humans are animals, though highly evolved. Second the part of us that "experiences deep feelings an demotions"...that sounds physical and brain based to me. I would go on but no one is interested in my opinions or metaphysical vision.
 
Upvote 0

Astrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
11,052
3,695
40
Hong Kong
✟188,686.00
Country
Hong Kong
Gender
Female
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
Now that is an interesting definition. First off, yes humans are animals, though highly evolved. Second the part of us that "experiences deep feelings an demotions"...that sounds physical and brain based to me. I would go on but no one is interested in my opinions or metaphysical vision.
What is interesting about that definition?
 
Upvote 0

Akita Suggagaki

Well-Known Member
Jul 20, 2018
10,103
7,221
70
Midwest
✟369,417.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
What is interesting about that definition?
It attributed, what seem to me, physical brain based phenomena such as deep feelings and emotions to a part of the person that is "not physical".

But then I may be wrong, Experiencing feelings and emotions may not be the same as identifying or being those feelings and emotions. What is it that experiences them?

Then again, that definition comes from Cambridge Dictionary that includes, "the inner character of a person". Doe anyone deny there is an inner character?

The point of debate seems to be more the Platonic higher forms that perhaps survive death which belong in philosophy.
 
Upvote 0

Akita Suggagaki

Well-Known Member
Jul 20, 2018
10,103
7,221
70
Midwest
✟369,417.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
"Our many-sided self arose in widely distributed brain networks. Since infancy, these self-oriented circuits have been over-conditioned by limbic biases. Selfhood then seems to have evolved along lines suggesting at least in shorthand the operations of a kind of ‘I-Me-Mine’ complex. But what happens when this egocentric triad briefly dissolves? Novel states of consciousness emerge."
James H. Austin, Consciousness evolves when the self dissolves - PhilPapers

Talk of "soul" brings us to sense of self. That is individualized ego self. But more scientific investigation is being done with other states of non-ego consciousness .
Brain sources of EEG gamma frequency during volitionally meditation-induced, altered states of consciousness, and experience of the self - ScienceDirect
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Aug 19, 2018
23,075
15,702
72
Bondi
✟371,025.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Now that is an interesting definition. First off, yes humans are animals, though highly evolved. Second the part of us that "experiences deep feelings an demotions"...that sounds physical and brain based to me.

Me too. I've seen nothing that would contradict that view.
 
Upvote 0

partinobodycular

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2021
2,626
1,047
partinowherecular
✟136,482.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
No, I never said here that something was true because the Bible says so. WHERE do I say that?
You're absolutely right, you never actually said "because the bible says so", but some of us have been around forums such as this one for a long time, and we've seen this tactic before, usually in 'Creation & Evolution' debates. A proponent of 'Intelligent Design' will specifically avoid invoking the bible, claiming that their arguments are based solely on science. But eventually they'll take a position who's only rationale is simply "because the bible says so". Unfortunately, you've crossed that threshold with the claim that people aren't animals.

People ARE animals.
You are denying that?

Yes, I'm denying it.

Human, a man. We are above nature, superior to all other life. That's just a fact.

So yes, your argument has unfortunately degenerated to "because the bible says so".
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Astrid
Upvote 0

Astrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
11,052
3,695
40
Hong Kong
✟188,686.00
Country
Hong Kong
Gender
Female
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
It attributed, what seem to me, physical brain based phenomena such as deep feelings and emotions to a part of the person that is "not physical".

But then I may be wrong, Experiencing feelings and emotions may not be the same as identifying or being those feelings and emotions. What is it that experiences them?

Then again, that definition comes from Cambridge Dictionary that includes, "the inner character of a person". Doe anyone deny there is an inner character?

The point of debate seems to be more the Platonic higher forms that perhaps survive death which belong in philosophy.
The deginition is of what some believe.
That's all.
 
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

On August Recess
Mar 11, 2017
21,697
16,380
55
USA
✟411,990.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
I personally believe that regular showers (or bathing) is what distinguishes us from 'the beasts' .. :)

That makes cats the most superior of all us mammals. I'm OK with that.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,676
52,517
Guam
✟5,131,066.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
No, I never said here that something was true because the Bible says so. WHERE do I say that?
Do you know what's really sad? The way so many atheists deliberately misrepresent the views of those they don't agree with!
I've got'em on pins and needles. ;)
 
Upvote 0